Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Feb 2, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Jeff Moore wrote: > 2010-01-31-15:38:31 philippe.amard: >> I shot these this afternoon; neither interesting nor artistic as such, >> but I used two bodies on a same lens, and didn't fiddle much with the >> files so I'd like to know your 'perception' of the rendition of either. >> >> Note that the light had changed ... cloudy background , then sunny, >> hence some WB issues, and or colour rendition? >> Other? >> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/PAW-2010/2010-PAW-04-Mutz-1310602.jpg.html > > These are so different because of the lighting change that I'm > disinclined even to try to pay attention to the equipment > differences. I like the prighter (Olympus?) one because with the > similar tones all through the fields around the tree, you get (without > post-processing nonsense) an almost-monochomatic, graphic look (though > with areas of subtle color like the greyish-blue sky and the > not-precisely-black leaves coming out of the snow). In that context, > the distracting element which weakens the picture would be the > out-of-focus foreground grass. I'd be tempted to see what things look > like when you try cropping that out, possibly trying to leave as much > as possible of the rock border. Doing so might require that you kill > some sky as well, if the balance looks off. But in this case the tree > might still work nicely right there in the middle. I like it very much.... I 'd be inclined to leave it as it is, seen, shot, appreciated...all as is... Steve > > -J > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information