Hi Philippe, Moose and all. Sorry for the late reply!
From: Philippe Amard <philippe.amard@xxxxxx>
>PAW 46 is up, but I'm still wondering if the crop
>
><
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/PAW-2009/2009-PAW-46-Triangulation-1140498.jpg.html
>
>
> is any better than the original shot.
>
><
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/PAW-2009/2009-PAW-46-Triangulation-1140498-2.jpg.html
>
Both are nice pictures, but I prefer the stronger, cropped shot -- less is
more ;^)
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
>A major weaknesses, for me is the way
>several elements are brighter than the primary subjects, particularly
>the woman.
><http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Amard/Triangulation.htm>
As always, a very nice work on it. However, despite the much improved tonal
detail in the 'messed with' version (and later), I find a bit confusing the
correction on the lit side of the wall: from centre towards the outside,
starts burned (that's OK), then it gets "much" darker but ends a bit
_lighter_, making some sort of negative 'halo'.
Speaking of triangulation... this thread reminded me of a snapshot I took a
while ago, where I detected later the triangular composition:
<http://cjss.sytes.net/post/ginette/IMG_9511.jpg>
[EOS-300D + plastic 18-55/3.5-5.6 kit zoom lens]
Cheers,
--
Carlos J. Santisteban Salinas
IES Turaniana (Roquetas de Mar, Almeria)
<http://cjss.sytes.net/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
