Bill, I like it the way it is. Nice image! Regards, Bob S. On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:48 AM, William Robb <anotherdrunken...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 19/07/2011 7:52 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >> William's shot is a nice image, but it appears to me that it was taken >> in a museum, under fluorescent lights with a wallpaper background. It >> that IS where it is taken (or something similar), then this is >> understandable and a nice representation of what was there. If it >> wasn't taken there and was an outdoors illuminated shot in nature, >> then I think the tone/color balance/tone mapping probably >> misrepresents the original scene in a rather unsatisfying way. > > > That was shot beside a fairly large creek in my favourite part of BC > (Rosebery) right at dusk. The "wallpaper background" is the stream itself > with the rocks just below the surface of the water. The combination of the > extended exposure and that they are somewhat out of focus is what is fooling > you into thinking it is something that it isn't. > That is a combination of two exposures, one to get the bulk of the image, > and one to get the mushroom, which was really dark. All I did was stack the > main exposure over the brighter one and erase the layer to show the mushroom > below it. > There was no tone mapping, and it is an accurate representation of what was > there, with the exception of using the double exposure to secure what the > camera couldn't do in one. > I should probably boost the gamma in the mushroom layer a bit, but it made a > very nice print on my wall, and I'm pretty much done with the file so I > probably won't. > -- > > William Robb > > -- > 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. >
-- 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.
