Actually, I think in this case I prefer Chris's version. It has a softer, more
etherial feel to it than the Moosed version. I know, that don't sound right
since we're talking HDR, but that's just the way it looks to me on my monitor.
Same with the bridge shot. The Moosed version brings out detail and highlights
that aren't in the original, but it ends up looking very slightly HDR'd. Chris
has a softer feel to his.
That said, I'm not as fond on the bridge as I am of the gardens.
My 0.02
--Bob Whitmire
www.bobwhitmire.com
On Jan 12, 2011, at 12:19 AM, Moose wrote:
> On 1/9/2011 10:41 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>> I walked in these gardens in Cambridge today; it was a sunny day, albeit
>> chilly with a low sun and I took my E-3 and G-12. I set my E-3 to record
>> both RAW and jpg (I normally use RAW only) and was rather pleased with the
>> results. In Aperture the jpg files need little or no adjustment, whereas
>> the RAW files look a little flat and require more adjustment to make them
>> look good on my monitor.
>
> That's actually what's supposed to happen, unless you are using the Oly
> software that applies the same setting from the
> camera that it used to make the JPEG. When you use Aperture, Lightroom, PS,
> etc., they don't make use of the camera
> settings in the same way.
>
>> I did this because I have read that the E-5 does a good job with jpgs and I
>> wondered what my E-3 would be like in these lighting conditions. All I did
>> was adjust the Exposure slightly and add Definition (LCE, I think). I
>> should be interested in anyone's thought on the matter; there's a selection
>> (5) here:
>>
>> http://threeshoes-photo.blogspot.com/
>
> I like all but the HDR. Maybe there's something wrong with my eyes, but HDR
> images almost always look both overdone and
> underdone at the same time to me. Here, the process has done terrible things
> to the sky, way over darkening it moving
> toward the top, while adding a strong, light halo along the skyline. In the
> meantime, it's flattened contrast and local
> contrast so as to make the foreground look like it was not shot in low sun.
>
> Shouldn't the scene look more like this?
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Barker/BotanicalGardenHDR.htm>
>
> I couldn't entirely get rid of the halo and the top of the sky is
> understaurated, but at least the plants catching the
> low sun have the proper glow and so on . . .
>
> No HDR Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|