Nice mood, I like the smooth water surface and the reflections. The lights look good, except the one between the leaves. It might be possible to adjust that one selectively, but I'm not familiar with the tools you have.
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Ciprian Dorin Craciun <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello all! [At the end of the email there is a short detour about > the Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8, and providing some context for the PESO.] > > > The PESO... After the dark set over the riverbank, while > stumbling in the dark (the lights on my side weren't working), I've > looked to the other side and found the restaurant so welcoming, luring > me with it's warm light. The outcome is below (~200 KiB): > > > http://data.volution.ro/ciprian/bdf753de58c560bc/395c04795f9e801b/variant-a--x800.jpg > > > However I'm uncertain about a few things and wanted to get your feedback: > > * The lights are blown out --- although only the lamps and not the > resulting starbusts --- and if I wanted to retain some detail I'm > afraid the surrounding would have been pushed to shadows. Moreover > one of the lamps was almost embedded in a tree, making the leafs glow. > How would you proceed in such a situation? One thought would be > multiple exposures and then layers in post-processing, but I would > like to get all in one exposure... > > * I decided to pull-up the shadows and have some visible details > on the riverbank. However this diminishes the warm light of the > restaurant, and the scene looks more like in the evening than after > the sun set... Should I have went for a more contrasting processing? > > * I preferred to keep the saturation low enough to have the trees > green-ish, and only pull-up on the reds (for the lights). However > this makes the picture look a little bit "washed", but on the other > hand I find it does make it seem more "peaceful". > > * I have a faint feeling that the resulting picture looks HDR-ish, > which was not my intention. > > > For those interested in comparing it with the original, I put > below the links to the exports from both RawTherapee and `dcraw` > without any additional processing except the "auto-magic" settings > (less than 200 KiB each): > > > http://data.volution.ro/ciprian/bdf753de58c560bc/395c04795f9e801b/export-rawtherapee--x800.jpg > > http://data.volution.ro/ciprian/bdf753de58c560bc/395c04795f9e801b/export-dcraw--x800.jpg > > For the the raw (~ 13 MiB) and other files you can look in: > http://data.volution.ro/ciprian/bdf753de58c560bc/395c04795f9e801b > > > Thanks for your time and I welcome any feedback, > Ciprian. > > > P.S.: About the Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8 lens... So, Friday I've > just received my first non-kit lens, a Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8, which > although quite cheap I hope will prove of better optical quality (i.e. > sharpness at over f/3.2-4) than the kit ones. Especially than the > Pentax DA 50-200mm WR, which although I've found I was using it (at > ~50mm) more than the corresponding 18-55 one, is quite soft (including > at f/8) for "far" subjects (i.e. more than 5m maybe). > > Anyway... Because I've got home only late, I didn't manage to try > it out while there actually light, I've decided to try a couple > low-light and some long exposure exposures. My first impression is > that this could be my "all-around" lens: > * the focal length is almost just right to exclude all the city > clutter from the photo; (maybe a little bit longer would have been > better;) > * light and small (and cheap) enough; > * "fast" enough (but kind of softer) when you need it; > * sharp enough (especially at f/4 or f/8); > > I two words: good enough! > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
