On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But, although I admire your technical expertise in your
> Moosification(s), I can't help feeling that "What Moose would do" is
> again too harsh. I recognise, of course, that you are free to enjoy
> your own expression or interpretation, but as a rule I prefer the
> tonal softness of the original. I enjoy the adjusted tonality of
> highlight or shadow, but the last one is just too "edgy" (I can't
> think of another word to describe how I feel about it).
Well, I really enjoyed Moose's demonstration. I guess it's because I
would have done exactly the same thing with the image if it were mine.
What I don't like about a lot of tinkering in PS is the tendency to
make it so that no one thing is more prominent than another. Another
way to say this is that no High Key or Low Key images may exist in a
photoshopped world. But in the case of this image, the tree cannot
help but be the pre-eminent element, so it feels to me that what Moose
has done is entirely the Right Thing To Do. Beautiful rendition, at
least to my taste.
Change topic: I skimmed the Pop Photo review of the E-30 and was
pleased to see that they shot all test images in RAW and used Olympus
software to convert them. I would have liked to have seen an example
of the camera's ability to manage multiple exposures among AF's shots
(oh well, can't have everything). The PP folks seemed to find the
funky effects to be a little more interesting than we did from AF's
samples. I wonder if using those effects, shooting RAW, and using
Studio improves the final result enough to redeem them.
Joel W.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|