Charlie Shugart Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
OntheRez wrote:
Charlie Shugart wrote:
OntheRez wrote:
The contrast observation shows up a lot with folks claiming everything from too much to not enough. (Charlie is normally the one saying I don't have enough
Robert
I'm innocent; I'm innocent! At least so far .
Charlie
Just noticed that some of the dark parts of the clouds were made darker in my edit. Oh, well.
Well, Charlie if you're innocent, then I'm rich 
I think part of what happens is that I'm optimizing the image for printing (This one looks rather nice at 13 x 19) and then just squeezing down a JPEG to post on line. Obviously - or maybe not so obvious cause I hadn't really noticed it till now - what works on my printer/paper combo does not necessarily the same as or as well on a website. In looking at your rendition I can see the fencing and such having a bit more character(?) but at the same time the cloud has gotten a bit too angry for want of a better word. The scene, as I experienced it, had the clouds as a lovely promise without so much threat in them.
I do find it fascinating that with only 2 colors - B&W - there is so much more passion and varying opinion on contrast, structure, and such than there is with color photos. Wonder why that is?
You suppose all B&W pix are actually complex Rorschach tests?
Robert
Robert-
All the more reason for the image-maker to have the final say .
BTW, I edited your image in two separate sections: the clouds, and everything else. I wasn't happy with the way the clouds came out, either. Mainly, I was trying to kill the cloud hot spots.
About the Rorschach tests: did you have to look up the spelling? Or did you know it? If you knew the correct spelling, THAT might be cause for worry .
Charlie
|