Comments interspersed: On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 14:26:04 -0700, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Frank .... > > Fair enough, although on my monitor, even with more light than usual in the > room, the couple is seen clearly. True, they are a bit on the dark side, > which was my intention as I wanted them to be a bit "mysterious, but I can > see their differentiation, the ring on the woman's finger, the curls in the > guy's hair, the folds in his sweatshirt hood, and so on. The problem stems > perhaps, in part, by the different monitors, monitor settings, viewing > conditions, and browsers or editing softwar in which any given photo is > viewed. My monitor is calibrated to be used in a room with a certain > amount of light, and the photo is presented with a gamma of 2.2. I've > looked at various pics (mine, yours, others) on various monitors and > systems, and they're all over the place wrt tonal rendition, contrast, > brightness.
AFAIK, my monitor (or more accurately, my roomate's monitor) hasn't been calibrated at all. I agree that viewing others web-images is hard, because quality is all over the place. > > Mind you, all this is not to negate your comments, but just to point out > how difficult it is to view images on the web when those images contain > certain elements and detail. It just doesn't work at all <sigh> - ok, it > works poorly - and all we can hope for is to get close. Agreed. > > I like the juxtaposition, and am not sure that changing the relationship > between the head and the people would do it for me. Changing the perspective was just one of the ways that I was thinking I could notice the couple a bit better. They just seemed "lost" in the background somehow - but maybe that's the way you wanted it. Possibly looking at the "right" exposure properties would be enough to allow me to "get into" the photo. As always, I'd really like to see the actual print. As you may imagine, > this pic was one of several, shot with slight variations of perspective, > and slightly different "moments" between the couple in the background. Of course, that's where we're different - I'd normally take only a couple of shots (or less), where I know you'll take many. I know you'd have chosen from a large number to pick the one that comes closest to your "vision" of what you wanted to accomplish with the shot. I, on the other hand... Oh well, this isn't about me. <vbg> > Anyway, I like it, so there! <LOL> And ~that~ of course, is the most important thing! > > I'm so glad you picked up on the wink ... ;-)) I thought that was central to the "message" of the photo. > > I sent you a private email yesterday ... hope you've received it. There > are several knarfian addresses in my address book. Yeah, and I'm using and checking all 3 addresses regularly. Got your e-mail, and have responded. > > Shel > cheers, frank -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
