That's the version I like. My comments about excessive contrast and
burned highlights were in reference to someone's remake of this image.
Love this one.
Paul
On Sep 25, 2005, at 1:35 AM, David Savage wrote:
Here you go Shel (and anyone else),
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0110_amber_042.htm
Originally posted by Bruce Dayton on the 8th Sept.
Dave
On 9/25/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would people PLEASE quote the URL in their responses. A number of
messages
don't make the list or the archives. Quoting the URL allows those of
use
receiving only replies an opportunity to see the pix as well.
Shel
[Original Message]
Wrom: BUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTF
At 06:43 AM 9/8/2005, Paul Stenquist wrote:
This example is far too bright on my screen, and the contrast has
rendered
her complexion almost ruddy. The highlights on her forehead and in
her
hair are near white.. My display is a calibrated Apple flat panel
with
the
brightness set rather low to match my printer output.
Paul
In real life, those forehead highlights are possibly "near white"
anyway.
Specular highlights such as these, show the color of the incident
light
much more than the color of the surface which the light is bouncing
off
of.
For example, lakes and rivers often aren't really the color they
appear
for
this reason. The color you see is the color of the sky and
surroundings
being reflected off the surface of the water. I've seen lakes with
greenish-brown water look a pretty shade of blue, courtesy of a
reflected
deep-blue sky overhead.
take care,
Glen
