Larry Colen wrote: >Mark Roberts wrote: >> Paul Stenquist wrote: >> >>> Great pics. But a fork, a spoon and a moon appears to be a photoshop job. >>> The tree branches are seen in silhouette but the bird is nicely illuminated. >>> By what? Especially against the moon background, which would have required >>> a sunny 16 exposure. Ain't gonna happen. >> >> Now *that's* what we call a "very good point"! >> >>> From the superficial examination one can perform on a web-resolution >> image, I think the bird has been subject to some dramatic dodging in >> Photoshop. I don't *think* it's a composite shot, but I'd have to have >> access to a full-res shot to be certain. Obviously, the judges do, and >> may even have access to the raw file. Perhaps this kind of Photoshop >> is allowed? I haven't read the contest rules but I know from going to >> the exhibit in the past and reading the technical descriptions of the >> photos some kinds of post-capture processing are allowed. > >photoshop would need to be allowed to get the Pleidies (sp?) shot.
Also note that the Perseid meteor shower shot is acknowledged to be a composite of multiple exposures (doesn't say how many). By the way, the error I alluded to in the beginning was in the Antarctic aurora shot. They called it the "Aurora Borealis" when it is actually the "Aurora Australis". >>>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2016/jul/27/astronomy-photographer-of-the-year-2016-shortlist-in-pictures -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- 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.
