On 10/11/2012 10:30 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> Moose grunted:
>
>> It is, to my mind, a superior image, in two different ways:
>> First, the pose is much better..
> I somewhat agree. The pose is better, but as she is looking towards the
> door, the door becomes the subject.
Reactions differ. I do not see the door as what she is looking at, I can't
imagine such emotion in her pose and face
about a door. I imagine someone(s) inside the open door as being the subject of
her gaze.
> As wall art, I think I prefer the
> first, but either one are far better than anything I can get. I would like
> to see both processed the same way, but honestly, absent a comparative,
> both are excellent.
>> Second, efx has done terrible things to the surface detail/texture of the
>> door...
> I'm wondering if this is more a function of how the JPEG engine has trashed
> those particular tones. With the stretching of the contrast curve like
> this, the JPEG engine is going to choke on these types of textures with
> those contrasts.
I think it's more than that. It looks to me like efx has done a lot of LCEish
stuff.
>> I'm not sure what efx is supposed to do, but it has gone far beyond
>> adjusting tonal curves to match a film look. I don't see why one would want
>> such harsh contrast and surfaces for such a tender subject.
> This might be where we could be parting ways in our thinking. The first
> image has a distinct museum look to it. The second has a more literal look.
> Maybe backing off a little bit, but throwing some localized
> contrast/brightness adjustment in a few spots to give the image the snap it
> needs. I fear that if Tina did that, though, it could end up with an
> overcooked photoshop look.
I think its better to start with the original, and add what one wants than to
try to undo what efx has done.
Working on the small screen with large changes in brightness with vertical
viewing angle is problematic. Still, perhaps
this will give an idea what I'm talking about - enhancing the drama somewhat,
without making it harsh.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Manley/Polly%20and%20LauraII.htm>
Hard to tell on this screen, but I might prefer it only half way between.
> This is the kind of picture that I'd love to have a negative of in order to
> darkroom print it with the densities and contrasts of the first one with
> the subtle tonalities in the skin and highlights that can be pulled out
> with split-grade printing.
I agree, some local adjustments would be useful. I just didn't have the time
and tools to do much of that today.
> Tina, this COULD be done. Digital file to a inkjet contact negative, then
> darkroom printed on AgX-Fiber with a heavy dose of selenium and coffee
> toning.
>
> Yum.
It's a Yum image.
Gently, Gently Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|