On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 09:38:25PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit: > Okay, this bird stuff is all new to me, so be gentle. I know it's not > entirely sharp, but it's (by my standards at least) sharp in some > places I'd like it to be (around the head and some of the water > ripples and stuff): > > http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.com/2010/05/swan.html > > Does it work?
Not in black and white. I *know* the bill should be screaming orange, and the strange grey causes speedbumps in my brain. There's something wrong -- this is more of a commiseration than a criticism, because swans are horrors from a managing-light-levels point of view -- with the choice of brightness curves because the base of the neck goes completely flat. Between the noticeable feather detail on the head, the drop of water off the bill, and the feather detail of the back (scapular feathers, but I'm trying to suppress this impulse of precision) it looks like something has gone wrong with the photograph to produce the flatness, rather like the differential-chemical-decay effect one sees in old prints. (if you're trying for looks-like-a-clean-scan- of-an-old-photo-of-a-swan, it's a resounding success, but I don't think you are.) The head detail is very nicely done. If you have more dots there, it would be nice to see that area larger and in colour. -- Graydon, who might point out there's a mute swan nest at the southwest corner of Grenadier Pond within 10 m of the sidewalk. (8 of the intervening meters are water, so it's not particularly crazy of the swans. Not that many people in Toronto actively want their leg broken.) -- 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.
