Jim wrote
>&> After 50 years of service, the city entered into a contract to re-line the
>&> sewer line on our street, and re-make all of the sewer taps. I have seen
>&> this from a distance, but, today, decided to see what it was all about.
>&> Fortunately, I'm on the corner, and connect to a large main on the
>&> adjacent street, so my yard escapes the damage.
>&>
>&> The job boss was waiting for his dump truck to return, so we discussed the
>&> job. He was happy to allow me to take photos. Here, he is in the cab
>&> waiting for the truck, and I got a bonus in a "selfie" in the mirror
>&> mounted on the upper corner of the cab.
>&> http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=9125
>&>
>&> When the truck returned, he resumed digging to expose the main sewer for
>&> the new tap. http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=9128
>&>
>&> Swinging around, he dumped the bucket load in the truck.
>&> http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=9131
>&>
>&> There are also a water main and a gas main along the street, so this takes
>&> more care than might be realized at first glance. And, beforehand, they
>&> asked customers to make limited use of their sewers while the work was
>&> underway, because their lines are open to the excavation.:-)
>&>
>&> Fuji X-E1 and 18-55
>&>
>&> Comments and critiques welcomed.
What a great record of local infrastructure ( actually, I detest that word)
renewal, Jim.
But there's something that puzzles me about how your shots display.
Now, I'm not running the latest of computer gear. XP, with a small Compaq CRT
monitor..
But all the photos of this group posted over the last few days have displayed
as one would
expect and hope for, and I process my own shots on it, with results which -
even if they don't
always please some people, do print up very well.
I know my eyes are failing now as sometimes I see evidence of cataracts
developing, but that
doesn't seem to affect what I see on my screen. It's different if I look at the
full moon - I see
the outlines of at least 4 of it :-(
So. ... you used a recently new camera for those three shots, but they do not
display well on
my computer set-up, at either the small size or the large size. They are in
focus, and not
blurred by shake, but, they look for all the world like scans of transparencies
which have not
gone all that well. I can't put my finger on what might have caused this, and
wonder if there's
something in your post-processing procedure that has gone astray?
As far as I can see it's not what I would expect from over-sharpening, but
maybe it is?
May I suggest that you start again with your images ex camera, and look closely
at the
results?
Sorry to maybe sound negative, but these three shots are away off the quality
of your usual
results.
Brian Swale
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|