Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Douglas - Boy, that's one fantastic save from such a pale image. You've got it right. Terrific! Looking at the image as you have modified it, makes me think that an ISO 400 VC or UC film might have produced the desired result (with slightly more careful exposure, of course) right out of the camera. Your directions are going in my keeper file. If anything interesting comes out of the others I took at the same time, I'll post them. It looks like my conclusion #3 (Photoshop can't fix everything.) needs re-thinking. Great fun. Thanks again. >Sorry this took a while Richard, I only just installed Elements 3.0 >and a few plugins that I had to get used to before I got round to >trying a few tricks on your image. > >Processing sequence as follows : >Grey point picked from a part of the road >a touch of Focus Magic to pick out the thinner twigs and the cars >shadow/highlight shift in PS >a warming filter >a slight increase in saturation >a touch more dark in the shadows > >I've posted your original, John's version and mine in the following >sub gallery. > >http://gallery.leica-users.org/TESTS > >Let me know what you think >regards >Douglas > > > >Richard S. Taylor wrote: >>John - Your "sinful" attempt to correct the image is certainly >>closer to what I saw - and thanks you and to all the others who >>responded with ideas and suggestions. >> >>What really bothers me about the photo (and about the dozen or so >>others I took at the same time) is the blown out highlights. I've >>now looked at the negatives more carefully and the highlights are >>badly blown out there, too. (Which eliminates the scanning as an >>issue.) I think if the highlights weren't so badly blown it might >>have been possible to make something of the picture. >> >>So, I think what I've learned is: >> >>1. ASA 400 color negative film really isn't universal. I should >>have used a longer-scale film, ASA 100 or so, in this situation. >> >>2. Overexposure really isn't OK with color negative film (though is >>far more forgiving than slide film). I've always exposed for the >>shadows and let the highlights take care of themselves. That >>obviously doesn't always work. >> >>3. Photoshop can't fix everything. >> >>You are forgiven. Your good works saved you. Go and sin no >>more... (unless that is, you want to try again to fix one of my >>miserable attempts to commit photography, in which case, sin away.) >> >>>May God have mercy on my immortal soul. Is this more what you had in mind? >>> >>>http://gallery.leica-users.org/album63/another_man_s_image >>> >>>John Collier >>> >>>On Dec 5, 2004, at 5:50 PM, Richard S. Taylor wrote: >>> >>>>As I turned onto Memorial Drive in Cambridge last week the >>>>sycamores along the drive were glowing white-gold in the >>>>mid-afternoon sunlight. I quickly parked and took pictures. The >>>>results were disappointing to say the least. I've posted one >>>>example here: >>>> >>>><http://gallery.leica-users.org/PICKS/21_0021> >>>> >>>>Photographic qualities of the picture aside, I wonder if any of >>>>you might have any thoughts on what I might have done to improve >>>>the rendition of the glowing trees that I saw with my eyes. >>>>There seems to be an exposure issue here since the highlights >>>>look blown out but would it have been better on a slower film, or >>>>is there a scanning problem, or something else? >>>> >>>>This photo isn't even close to the image I had in my head. >>>>Manipulation in Photoshop to darken the image overall helps but >>>>isn't really the solution. The posted picture is unmanipulated >>>>and uncropped. >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Leica Users Group. >>>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Regards, Dick Boston MA