Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Three Trees  (Read 130 times)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 973
Three Trees
« on: October 04, 2019, 05:49:11 pm »

First photo this autumn

Logged

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 563
    • AirStream Pictures
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2019, 06:32:51 pm »

First photo this autumn

I like it. Feels very classical.
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17702
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2019, 08:52:05 am »

Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22578
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2019, 09:40:11 am »

Worth waiting for the season!

Rob

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10193
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2019, 11:17:16 am »

Simple and classical and I like it a lot.
Logged
Francois

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2019, 11:59:49 am »

It's a fine image. However it looks way oversharpened on my monitor. Perhaps it is meant to be seen large so that it doesn't look so crunchy.

JR
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 06:30:30 pm by John R »
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8024
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2019, 12:15:17 pm »

I find the bottom half, with the three trunks, very much more interesting than the upper.

Jeremy
Logged

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 973
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2019, 06:31:01 pm »

It's a fine image. However it looks way oversharpened on my monitor. Perhaps it is meant to be seen large so that it does look so crunchy.

JR

Interesting, John.
The first flaw, which I believed to be of no importance, is that the actual image was reduced to 800x536 pixels (gray mat added later) 240 pixels/inch instead of 72 ppi. I actually do not see any difference in crunchiness.
The original image had been sharpened very slightly before being reduced and no sharpening applied for the LULA version.
So I tried reducing  "Texture" on the foliage, leaving the lighter trunks untouched
But I was not satisfied. I'll take another look




« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 06:36:39 pm by rabanito »
Logged

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Three Trees
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2019, 05:51:47 am »

Interesting, John.
The first flaw, which I believed to be of no importance, is that the actual image was reduced to 800x536 pixels (gray mat added later) 240 pixels/inch instead of 72 ppi. I actually do not see any difference in crunchiness.
The original image had been sharpened very slightly before being reduced and no sharpening applied for the LULA version.
So I tried reducing  "Texture" on the foliage, leaving the lighter trunks untouched
But I was not satisfied. I'll take another look
I wouldn't worry about it much. If it looks good on your end that's all that matters. Everything on the net is subject to some kind of compression. The tonal range looks excellent.

JR
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up