Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Wed, 28 February 2001, Tom Finnegan wrote: > > 2001 PAW > http://www.zing.com/album/?id=4293118291 > PAW/9 doesn't have the impact of your PAW/4. The big difference I see is that with PAW/4 the water surface is almost featureless except for the 2 circles where the oars had been, while with PAW/9 the oars' ripples are lost in the detail of the water's surface. It's the contrast of the oars' ripples against the featureless water that make PAW/4 so interesting. PAW/9's water is too busy to show the same contrast. Doug Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com ___________________________________________________ The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe Better! Faster! More Powerful! 250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now! http://www.compuserve.com/trycsrv/cs2000/webmail/