Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Ultimately, the 9-18 wasn't needed

Subject: Re: [OM] Ultimately, the 9-18 wasn't needed
From: Paul Braun <pbraun42@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015 09:10:31 -0600
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:

> Here's one of the photos I took of our Florida place for a sales listing.
> This is a 9mm shot with some shadow fill and contrast adjustment and
> resizing for this page but is otherwise out of the camera.  ACR tells me
> that the image was automatically adjusted based on the 9-18mm lens
> profile.  Note that there is some residual barrel distortion most easily
> visible in the archway at right.  I can fix it up some more in PhotoShop
> but have left it as is so you can see it.
>
> <http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=16004>
>
> In the subject line I state that the 9-18 ultimately wasn't needed. That's
> because, yesterday, as we were driving back to South Carolina from Florida
> I got a call on my cell phone that there was already an offer on the house
> made by a neighbor.  Over the next couple of hours we negotiated a price
> and, as I write this, I'm waiting for a contract to arrive via email.
>
>
Congrats! But at least you have a new lens in the kit....

-- 

Paul Braun WD9GCO
Certified Music Junkie

"Music washes from the soul the dust of everyday life." -- Berthold Auerbach
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz