geebee wrote:
> http://www.geebeephoto.com/Northamptonshire_Churches/M-Z/pages/Welford.htm
>
Nice additions. Not quite as good IQ as your usual. I assume these are
with the Panny superzoom. The noise in Welford_1 and "different" blown
highlights in 3 are a giveaway. The film handles highlights with a
smoother roll-off, less blooming.
> http://www.geebeephoto.com/Northamptonshire_Churches/M-Z/pages/Woodford_1.htm
>
Woodford_1 is a great composition and you sure got the sky and light!
Wow! The 16:9 format is perfect for the subject. Certainly an
interesting roof line.
Woodford_3 is nice, but feels like the centre is bulging toward me.
Barrel distortion? It also illustrates a general problem with the
exterior shots. the close wall has pretty good sense of detail
definition in the stone, but in the farther back parts, the detail seems
to lose the sense of definition. In the tower and steeple, there are
only intimations of underlying detail.
Woodford_5 is possibly the worst of this effect in color, but it is
there to one extent or another in all the exteriors of both churches.
Woodford_2 is odder, with the church itself distinctly lacking in
definition. I wonder if this is a single channel conversion, which drops
definition from the other sensor points. I'd guess green channel from
the foliage, but the sky makes me less sure. There's also what appears
to be an odd texture in the tree on the left, which I assume is noise.
Again, the composition is up to your usual high standards, and you have
done well with the limited DR in all but those shot where it just can't
be done. But in case you were wondering whether the difference from the
film is noticeable in small web images; yes, it is.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|