Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/02/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On 2/2/05 7:28 PM, "Tina Manley" <images@infoave.net> typed: > At 09:40 PM 2/2/2005, you wrote: >> I was raised in the Great Dismal Swamp in NE North Carolina. > > Color is very subjective. Here are two photos of the same scene made on > different days. Which one is "correct"? > > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/39336098 > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/39336122 > > I think it's human nature to see two renditions of the same image and think the best would be one in the middle. But that is exactly what I strongly feel is happening here. The original image was almost 2000k kool IMO. But the correction made it about the same amount warm. That's what I like about the fade feature in Photoshop. Although I guess this was scanning software. (which is what's so good about raw scans) Not matter what I do I feel as if I have a built in "idiot factor". Which I almost always need. I do what I think is best but rarely is it not improved about if I bring it back 25 percent to 50 percent. You can use that filter with a brush stroke or the use of the clone tool. So many times it seems I've made a mistake in a choice in what to do. But the fade filter shows me my intentions were honorable. If I just bring it back 90 percent. Sure it needed red. It just didn't need very much. But that small pinch of red sure helped and I'm glad it's there. I which we had that in life. And Norton's "Speed Disk" for the Brain". Works out the same for the auto color when it's way off. Generally it started out in the right direction. But instead of fading an auto color I just undo it and try an auto levels, undo that they try auto contrast. One of those will correct the color nicely the other two won't. And you never know which one. But the auto color works for me 65 percent of the time. And no wasn't keeping score! Mark Rabiner Photography Portland Oregon http://rabinergroup.com/