On 4/10/06, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> AG Schnozz wrote:
> >> http://myweb.uiowa.edu/jfwilcox/day/day65.html
> >>
> >
> > Very nice interpretation. The eyes/nose thing is freaky, though.
> >
> Although I'm prone to finding faces, et. in shapes, I didn't see any in
> this one, so I was simply able to enjoy a nice capture of a beautiful
> natural scene.
>
> Looking at it again, I do see a cool face thingie, including a mouth on
> its right side, viewer's left. But first, I saw a huge, ancient frog
> face in the lower part of the rock pile on the lower right.
>
> And looking at 64 again, I see a giant, reddish brown dog head, with the
> falls coming out or its mouth. Clifford? Time to move on. :-) Oh, no,
> there's a turtle head.....
> > This is one of those scenes that I can tell would be a touch
> > more difficult to get a good composition out of because the
> > "power elements" don't always land where you want them. You
> > handled it well and it's another picture I've never seen before.
> I sorta think I know what you mean, but I haven't got it down in such
> terms. There are enough elements that it could easily fall apart as a
> single image. But it somehow holds together and I think that tension
> adds to it. A vertical crop from the left edge to just short of the frog
> head and losing just a bit off the bottom is much 'simpler' and quite
> pleasing to my eye, too.
>
> In a "takes one to know one" vein, I find some of this series somewhere
> in the vicinity of over sharpened. I'm often fighting, and sometimes
> losing, the edge between enough sharpening to give a sense in a small
> version of the sharpness and detail of the larger original and so much
> sharpening that it gives an unnatural edginess to the image. With this
> one, it seemed over when I first looked at it. Tilt my head, look at
> some details, then back up straight and see the whole thing, and it
> looks fine.
>
> Moose
Interesting about the sharpening comment. I purchased Fred M's SI Pro
over the weekend. I used it to downsample this image to web size. I
often feel the need to do a tiny bit of sharpening right after
downsampling, but not with SI Pro. I've seen web demos of how SI Pro
works, but real life is better. Day64 printed really well at about
12x15. I should read the documentation. I've been shooting from the
hip.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|