I'm not too proud to say that's the greatest thing I've seen in a
long time.
And here I sat thinking that the whole "cormorant" thing was just some
simple, quirky idiosyncrasy of the PDML list. Little did I know!
Thanks for the info and the guffaw (a word which, if I'm not mistaken,
is derived from the mating call of the cormorant).
-- Walt
On 10/5/2010 4:53 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Walter Gilbert wrote:
what do all of you real photographers do with images that may
be flawed, but still have some redeeming qualities to them. For
instance, a shot that's too poorly focused to rescue with sharpening
tools and so forth, but does capture a sense of action that is somewhat
appealing. Like this one, for example:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/7X4Utq1sTP4AoZG2S3S0zQ?feat=directlink
That's a great question.
There are many answers and it largely depends on to what end you put
your photography. The image you used as an example could be an
excellent illustration in some applications. (With some Photoshop
tweaking it might be work even better as a "photo illustration", as
they're sometimes termed.)
Out-of-focus shots can sometimes serve as backgrounds in multimedia
applications or print layouts.
Sometimes a composition that doesn't work as a standalone shot serves
as an excellent container or background to a montage. In one instance
that has gone down in PDML history, someone posted a shot of a
Cormorant in a tree and expressed disappointment that he couldn't
quite make the composition work as well as he would have liked. Then
Cotty pointed out that the empty areas of the frame were situated in a
way that made it ideal for a magazine cover. The mock-up he whipped
together to make his point left reverberations that are being felt to
this day:
http://www.robertstech.com/graphics/pages/1cormorant.htm
--
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.
