A very nice image. Well processed and worth the look. A cast? Does it matter? NO. 99% of images probably have a cast of some sort and most probably benefit from having one. A few years ago it was all the rage to find a mid tone and balance out the three channels to neutralise any cast. Did it make an image better. IMO NO. Unfortunately too many members would rather nitpick an image than praise it.
No nit-picking here, just trying to understand it. That is how we learn
Vieri - thanks for explaining the choice of toning, and it was not something that crept in when translating to the Web. I agree with others it is a very nice image.
Dave
No problems whatsoever on my end, I am glad to explain my processes and the reasoning behind my choices, hoping that it might be of some use to others.
That said, what stamper said happens often on this and other similar forums. "Some" nitpicking it is to be expected, to a degree, in a house full of photographers, and it's acceptable and perhaps even useful - to a degree at least. Of course, despite all moderation, it might happen that some negative character manages to slip through and poison some threads with "excessive" nitpicking, spreading unnecessary negativity around, but certainly this is not happened here as far as I am concerned. What I found interesting is the "nature" of the cast, that someone saw as reddish, other as bluish, etc. To me, this once more showed perfectly how viewing images on monitors that can possibly be very different and differently calibrated, while very practical, is perhaps not the best way to enjoy and critique an image...