If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:35:48 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 5/23/2014 10:24 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: smip Now it's https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva In your BW conversion you seem to have lost the texture in the sky. I lit a subtle sky with texture, the green foreground a darker green, and the bare branches gone. I don't think you need them. Please post another link to the NEF and I should have a chance to play later today. Link coming up: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:35:48 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 5/23/2014 10:24 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: smip Now it's https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva In your BW conversion you seem to have lost the texture in the sky. I lit a subtle sky with texture, the green foreground a darker green, and the bare branches gone. I don't think you need them. Please post another link to the NEF and I should have a chance to play later today. I don't think Dropbox photos helps the images. Here is a JPG of my quick and dirty B&W. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...26W%20copy.jpg -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:27:11 -0400, PeterN
wrote: On 5/23/2014 8:00 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: On Fri, 23 May 2014 08:23:22 -0700, John McWilliams wrote: On 5/23/14 PDT, 5:54 AM, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-23 12:42:13 +0000, Savageduck said: On 2014-05-23 11:29:25 +0000, Savageduck said: Snipped bits out OK! First the ACR adjustments. This time I used *Camera Neutral* instead of *Camera Standard* Then I fixed the spots. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_708.jpg Next the CA adjustment. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_710.jpg Now the basic adjustments including black & white point setting. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_711.jpg Then a further adjustment to the foreground using the adjustment brush. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_712.jpg Finally in ACR some sharpening. Note the settings with a fairly heavy handed on the masking to exclude the areas where sharpening is not wanted. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_709.jpg Only resizing and crop was done in PS CC, and the final version added to the DB folder with the other two. No additional sharpening. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/10ne14df8...Eric%20Project BTW: Here was my crop POV. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_714.jpg For my taste, foreground is too crunchy, diverts attention. As to cropping, I'd like to see more open space- a gap in the flora- on the left side, showing a bit of open ocean. I also like the B+W better. How about: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza Error 404. Dropbox seems to be playing games with me today. I think that was supposed to be my B&W, URL's for which I've already posted in another article. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-24 23:06:12 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Wed, 21 May 2014 15:46:16 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza A surpringly large number of people have responded to my email above, for which I am very grateful. I would like to thank everyone for responding. Opinions were expressed with 2 as the very clear favourite as follows: In favour of 1 2 3 0 10 1 I will now admit I wasn't completely honest in my initial article. I had already made my decision in favour of 2 about a week before I posted article. I had arranged for the print to be framed and in view of the conflicting opinions expressed in this house I wanted to find outwhether or not I had no taste or merely very poor taste. In any case, here is the framed print alongside the one it was suppose to match. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva Notice the difference in the colour of the matting. I was never entirely happy with the colour of matte on the left and now I am less happy. Before anyone comments: I have two small spotlights up on the ceiling and these have yet to be correctly re-aimed. The off white, two tone matte is OK. It would just have been nice to have matched mattes in both frames. It might be worthwhile getting one, or the other, or both, re-matted. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-24 23:17:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:35:48 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 5/23/2014 10:24 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: smip Now it's https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva In your BW conversion you seem to have lost the texture in the sky. I lit a subtle sky with texture, the green foreground a darker green, and the bare branches gone. I don't think you need them. Please post another link to the NEF and I should have a chance to play later today. I don't think Dropbox photos helps the images. Here is a JPG of my quick and dirty B&W. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...26W%20copy.jpg Sorry that doesn't work for me. It is neither here, nor there as a B&W conversion. Your opacity adjusted layer technique isn't right for that image. The way it is presented it has a bad selective color feel to it, and the contrast for the hills looks too harsh. This is where I prefer my softer approach with the sight selenium tone. https://db.tt/TT7e6kYX -- Regards, Savageduck |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Sat, 24 May 2014 16:58:39 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On 2014-05-24 23:17:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:35:48 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 5/23/2014 10:24 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: smip Now it's https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva In your BW conversion you seem to have lost the texture in the sky. I lit a subtle sky with texture, the green foreground a darker green, and the bare branches gone. I don't think you need them. Please post another link to the NEF and I should have a chance to play later today. I don't think Dropbox photos helps the images. Here is a JPG of my quick and dirty B&W. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...26W%20copy.jpg Sorry that doesn't work for me. It is neither here, nor there as a B&W conversion. Your opacity adjusted layer technique isn't right for that image. The way it is presented it has a bad selective color feel to it, and the contrast for the hills looks too harsh. This is where I prefer my softer approach with the sight selenium tone. https://db.tt/TT7e6kYX Yours works better in a smaller print viewed more closely. I think mine works better in a larger print likely to be viewed from across a room. Mind you, I'm not going to print a large and small of each to find out whether I'm right or not. :-) My views have nothing to do with the fact that I can't find a quick and dirty way in PS to emulate your image. I have several ideas which will make it a piece of cake if they work. I would particularly like to try a gradient 50% grey fill. Right now I'm going to have lunch. Considering everything overall, this has been a very helpful discussion. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On Sat, 24 May 2014 16:51:12 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On 2014-05-24 23:06:12 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Wed, 21 May 2014 15:46:16 +1200, Eric Stevens wrote: Some years ago I used my trusty D70 to take a photograph of a west coast bay in rough conditions. Recently I've been trying to arrive at a composition suitable for printing on matte paper in A2 size and suitable for framing and hanging on a wall. My present problem is that every member of my family has a different idea of the best composition and in an attempt to bring peace I have made three different versions. That hasn't really helped as I now have three different sets of strong opinions. I know that computer monitors are not ideal for viewing and proofing prints of this kind but I am interested in gathering the opinions of anyone in this newsgroup who is bold enough to state one. You can find a JPG of each version in: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...M2OQuylz7CgFza A surpringly large number of people have responded to my email above, for which I am very grateful. I would like to thank everyone for responding. Opinions were expressed with 2 as the very clear favourite as follows: In favour of 1 2 3 0 10 1 I will now admit I wasn't completely honest in my initial article. I had already made my decision in favour of 2 about a week before I posted article. I had arranged for the print to be framed and in view of the conflicting opinions expressed in this house I wanted to find outwhether or not I had no taste or merely very poor taste. In any case, here is the framed print alongside the one it was suppose to match. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva Notice the difference in the colour of the matting. I was never entirely happy with the colour of matte on the left and now I am less happy. Before anyone comments: I have two small spotlights up on the ceiling and these have yet to be correctly re-aimed. The off white, two tone matte is OK. It would just have been nice to have matched mattes in both frames. It might be worthwhile getting one, or the other, or both, re-matted. I'm going to. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 2014-05-25 00:42:52 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sat, 24 May 2014 16:58:39 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-24 23:17:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: Le Snip I don't think Dropbox photos helps the images. Here is a JPG of my quick and dirty B&W. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...26W%20copy.jpg Sorry that doesn't work for me. It is neither here, nor there as a B&W conversion. Your opacity adjusted layer technique isn't right for that image. The way it is presented it has a bad selective color feel to it, and the contrast for the hills looks too harsh. This is where I prefer my softer approach with the sight selenium tone. https://db.tt/TT7e6kYX Yours works better in a smaller print viewed more closely. I think mine works better in a larger print likely to be viewed from across a room. Mind you, I'm not going to print a large and small of each to find out whether I'm right or not. :-) My views have nothing to do with the fact that I can't find a quick and dirty way in PS to emulate your image. I have several ideas which will make it a piece of cake if they work. I would particularly like to try a gradient 50% grey fill. Right now I'm going to have lunch. Considering everything overall, this has been a very helpful discussion. I am not really a fan of “quick & dirty” B&W conversions, straight greyscale mode changes, etc. I feel that I can get so much more out of the original by using a color sensitivity adjustment, or filter approach in ACR, LR5, or with a dedicated plugin such as NIK Silver Efex Pro 2. That way I can take a relatively bland shot and get an acceptable B&W rendition. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_718.jpg https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...951_Edit-3.jpg BTW: One might be tempted to comment on the level of the horizon, but from that position out on the Carrizo Plain, which is bisected by the San Andreas Fault Zone, there is very defined rise from West to East. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_719.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 5/25/2014 12:58 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-25 00:42:52 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 24 May 2014 16:58:39 -0700, Savageduck wrote: On 2014-05-24 23:17:30 +0000, Eric Stevens said: Le Snip I don't think Dropbox photos helps the images. Here is a JPG of my quick and dirty B&W. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...26W%20copy.jpg Sorry that doesn't work for me. It is neither here, nor there as a B&W conversion. Your opacity adjusted layer technique isn't right for that image. The way it is presented it has a bad selective color feel to it, and the contrast for the hills looks too harsh. This is where I prefer my softer approach with the sight selenium tone. https://db.tt/TT7e6kYX Yours works better in a smaller print viewed more closely. I think mine works better in a larger print likely to be viewed from across a room. Mind you, I'm not going to print a large and small of each to find out whether I'm right or not. :-) My views have nothing to do with the fact that I can't find a quick and dirty way in PS to emulate your image. I have several ideas which will make it a piece of cake if they work. I would particularly like to try a gradient 50% grey fill. Right now I'm going to have lunch. Considering everything overall, this has been a very helpful discussion. I am not really a fan of quick & dirty B&W conversions, straight greyscale mode changes, etc. I feel that I can get so much more out of the original by using a color sensitivity adjustment, or filter approach in ACR, LR5, or with a dedicated plugin such as NIK Silver Efex Pro 2. That way I can take a relatively bland shot and get an acceptable B&W rendition. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_718.jpg https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...951_Edit-3.jpg BTW: One might be tempted to comment on the level of the horizon, but from that position out on the Carrizo Plain, which is bisected by the San Andreas Fault Zone, there is very defined rise from West to East. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/Fil...enshot_719.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck I like it. -- PeterN |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Opinions Wanted
On 5/24/2014 7:09 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 24 May 2014 11:35:48 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 5/23/2014 10:24 PM, Eric Stevens wrote: smip Now it's https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ok28ebd3p...s0Am5pTwRtDQva In your BW conversion you seem to have lost the texture in the sky. I lit a subtle sky with texture, the green foreground a darker green, and the bare branches gone. I don't think you need them. Please post another link to the NEF and I should have a chance to play later today. Link coming up: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...3/_DSC1370.NEF Here is my version, using a 2 x 3 aspect ratio: I saved a layered tif. To help you to follow what I did, the layers are labeled. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/Eric%20file.tif I had some DB issues, so I also saved a jpeg. I assigned the ICC profile Adobe RGB to maintain tonal integrity. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/Eric%20file.jpg -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Upgrade to CS3 - Opinions Wanted | Steven Wandy | Digital Photography | 15 | August 13th 07 07:16 AM |
Upgrade to CS3? Opinions Wanted | Steven Wandy | Digital SLR Cameras | 4 | August 10th 07 12:20 AM |
Opinions Wanted | remove | Digital Photography | 5 | October 7th 06 06:46 PM |
Opinions wanted, red sensitivity issue perhaps? | Cheesehead | Digital Photography | 2 | April 17th 06 12:06 AM |
Opinions wanted on Minolta Z6 | crazygolfer | Digital Photography | 1 | November 27th 05 03:21 PM |