I submitted them on a CD for projection on a 1024x768 projector, so 1024
was the
maximum length of the horizontal. The files had to be TIFFs in Adobe RGB.
I
exported them as specified from Lightroom, but didn't do any sharpening or
other
work on the tiffs. The results were very disappointing - flat looking,
soft, no
snap, so they were justified in what they said.
Bob I've done several CDs of my images for digital projection (workshop &
church use) & have come up the following sharpening routine for projection -
+ After all sizing has been done, just before I save, I apply 3 rounds of
unsharp mask -
1st round - @ 100/0.4/2.0 <Amount/radius/threshold>
2nd & 3rd rounds @125/0.2/0.
I'm in the habit of applying only to the Lightness channel in LAB mode but
I'm not sure it makes any difference for projection.
Works for me - hope this helps you !
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RPS Workshop
Had an interesting time at the RPS Workshop where I showed some of my Fez
photos
today. In short they took quite a battering. Not for the content or
subject
matter, although of course some pictures were stronger than others, but
for the
technical quality.
I submitted them on a CD for projection on a 1024x768 projector, so 1024
was the
maximum length of the horizontal. The files had to be TIFFs in Adobe RGB.
I
exported them as specified from Lightroom, but didn't do any sharpening or
other
work on the tiffs. The results were very disappointing - flat looking,
soft, no
snap, so they were justified in what they said. I've no idea why the
quality was
so poor - I have to do some investigating.
I may consider prints though, and a different style of presentation.
Thanks to everyone who helped in the selection and sequencing. Watch this
space.
Bob
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
