|
|
|
carlos sanchez
{K:3631} 11/11/2005
|
?????????
good work!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
George Black
{K:102014} 10/4/2005
|
"Geek is good." --Bill Gates
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Thanks Bob
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Boy, I just love getting into this geek talk...being a bit geeky myself...hardware specs are your friends. I recently got involved with one of the forum discussions about monitors, calibration, monitor quality, and setting and could ramble on ad-nauseum. Looks like you're doing your housekeeping well George. I'm gunna take the advice from you and Alastair next time I encounter an image I like that requires some surgery....thanks for the great feedback
|
|
|
|
Robert Delgadillo
{K:3509} 10/4/2005
|
The light tones are so nice here Larry. Excellant timing of this shot.
|
|
|
|
|
George Black
{K:102014} 10/4/2005
|
OK, I looked for noise, but all I found looked fine for this scene. (It's very nice, by the way.) My monitor is set at 1280x1024 and calibrated regularly. You were right about the NeatImage version, more mud than mist. The intermediate version looks all right and may be better for making a pretty big print. In my experience, NeatImage can produce great results when all else fails, but I almost always pull it back a bit. Using layers and opacity adjustments as Alistair suggests is certainly effective. Being lazy, I use one of my favorite controls--Edit>Fade . . . That adjusts your last filter or adjustment beautifully. And the process is elegant. By the way, did I mention that I like the picture a lot?
Stay smooth,
--George
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Thansk again Bryan
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Well...there you go...one of the vargarities of our digital world
|
|
|
|
|
Bryan Jarmain
{K:11941} 10/4/2005
|
Well seen, and very nicely taken, Larry.
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Telzerow
{K:4993} 10/4/2005
|
Okay, Okay... At 800X600, I have a fair amount of noise, especially on the water... When I return to 1024X768, it virtually disappears. Try printing yours and Alastair's Noise Reduction Version, and see how it shows up... :-)
Still a great shot...
Cheers,
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Nessy's coming for you Bill..another issue is monitor setting... for example if you have you monitor set to 800x600 you may see a totally dirrerent perspective of some photos...try it out sometime....Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Telzerow
{K:4993} 10/4/2005
|
Nice shot Larry... Not sure about noise levels; I often wonder if there is so much variation between "digital" monitors that we see things not from the photo, but from the "digits". The shot is clean on mine, and even has the appearance of Loch Ness... :-) Nice Grab!
Bill
|
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 10/4/2005
|
Hi Larry, on my monitor I don't see any noise at all! It may be because of the lighting on the mist that it looks that way.
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Alastair & I had a long chat about noise on this one...does it look overly nosiy to you Dave?
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Stacey
{K:150877} 10/4/2005
|
Excellent image, looking through the mist, Larry!
Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Seems to have retained just a slight more detail...I'll keep the technique in mind Alastair...Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Thanks Marcus
|
|
|
|
|
Alastair Bell
{K:29571} 10/4/2005
|
Yes I see what you mean. Mist is always more difficult than most other shots. A trick I use is to create a duplicate layer, apply the noise filter on minimum setting, then adjust the opacity of the layer to achieve the best compromise. I use Noiseware as my preference as I find it easier to set the parameters I want.
I've had a go at it using the technique above. Its a very subtle difference but let me know what you think.
Alastair
|
Layer duplicated, noise filtered then 50% opacity |
|
|
|
Marcus Armani
{K:36599} 10/4/2005
|
wow now this is a very nice moody shot, I love the ground fog on the water with the nice bridge in the distance, you shure know how to pick your spots...
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Alastair
I ran it through NeatImage...see attached results. This is always a tradeoff in IMHO. Less noise but also less detail. I used PS noise reduction on the original posting to the point where I thought significant detail was comprimised. Let me know what you think...I can always use good advice on this type of issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Fosse
{K:66493} 10/4/2005
|
Thanks Alastair
|
|
|
|
|
Alastair Bell
{K:29571} 10/4/2005
|
I know how hard it is to capture mist on water like this and therefore realise what a great job you've done here. Nice line of sunlight thrugh the middle too. My only criticism is that there seems to be a bit of digital noise throughout the whole image - I think running it through a noise filter like Noiseware or Neatimage (for example) would help immensely.
Well seen and shot though...
Alastair
|
|
0 
