Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: household ornaments  (Read 1556 times)

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1077
    • flickr
household ornaments
« on: October 25, 2011, 11:41:30 am »

I have been reworking this shot, off and on, for the last three years.  With recent work, it has started looking better to me.  Please critique.

Bruce
Logged

louoates

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 836
    • Lou Oates Photography
Re: household ornaments
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2011, 01:52:45 pm »

Sorry, Bruce. I can't see what this is supposed to be. I can see a tree-top angel but the rest is just confusing to me.
Logged

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1077
    • flickr
Re: household ornaments
« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2011, 12:39:53 pm »

Attached is a more simply processed version of the whole handheld frame, f 5.6, 1/30s, 24 mm equiv., ISO 160.  The most prominent, if closer than minimum focal distance, figure on the right side of the frame is a common, around here, wooden polychrome figurine from [the interior? of] Mexico.

Bruce
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18087
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: household ornaments
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2011, 12:59:25 pm »

One of the examples where the original is better than fancy post-processing. The "simply processed" version is too simply processed... even Auto Levels in Apple's Preview improves it.

shutterpup

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: household ornaments
« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2011, 02:56:20 pm »

One of the examples where the original is better than fancy post-processing. The "simply processed" version is too simply processed... even Auto Levels in Apple's Preview improves it.

+1
Logged

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1077
    • flickr
Re: household ornaments
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2011, 06:47:18 pm »

One of the examples where the original is better than fancy post-processing. The "simply processed" version is too simply processed... even Auto Levels in Apple's Preview improves it.

Yes, it was too simple.  I have made a more ernest effort to do well without being fancy, but I only was only able to get so far with it, and so could not resist layering the fancy version over it.  It is now only semi-simple.

Bruce
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up