On 2/15/2016 8:15 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 15/02/2016 04:47 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> Those are all very nice, but the colors are not very vibrant, and there
>> is not a lot of contrast between the lights and darks. Sunnier weather
>> might make for easier pictures.
>
> Yeah, having an expensive camera makes it possible to get much closer
> shots, but no camera on Earth allows me to control the Sun, sadly. :-(

Wrong!
First you need a virgin and a sharp knife… ;)

Actually I think that they are just a tad overexposed.
I adjusted the exposure in Paint Shop Pro. What do you think?
(BTW I cancelled my last post because the image sizes were too big.)



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'image5.jpg' (75 KB) Download 'image6.jpg' (136 KB)

Preview of image 'image5.jpg'

Preview of image 'image6.jpg'

Am 15.02.2016 um 09:57 schrieb Stephen:
> On 2/15/2016 8:15 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> On 15/02/2016 04:47 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> Those are all very nice, but the colors are not very vibrant, and there
>>> is not a lot of contrast between the lights and darks. Sunnier weather
>>> might make for easier pictures.
>>
>> Yeah, having an expensive camera makes it possible to get much closer
>> shots, but no camera on Earth allows me to control the Sun, sadly. :-(
> 
> Wrong!
> First you need a virgin and a sharp knife... ;)
> 
> Actually I think that they are just a tad overexposed.
> 
> I adjusted the exposure in Paint Shop Pro. What do you think of these two?

I think Andy's original posts look pretty realistic, much more so than
your tweaked versions.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/15/2016 9:08 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 15.02.2016 um 09:57 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 2/15/2016 8:15 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> On 15/02/2016 04:47 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>>> Those are all very nice, but the colors are not very vibrant, and there
>>>> is not a lot of contrast between the lights and darks. Sunnier weather
>>>> might make for easier pictures.
>>>
>>> Yeah, having an expensive camera makes it possible to get much closer
>>> shots, but no camera on Earth allows me to control the Sun, sadly. :-(
>>
>> Wrong!
>> First you need a virgin and a sharp knife... ;)
>>
>> Actually I think that they are just a tad overexposed.
>>
>> I adjusted the exposure in Paint Shop Pro. What do you think of these two?
>
> I think Andy's original posts look pretty realistic, much more so than
> your tweaked versions.
>

I prefer Andrew's too. The colours look quite naturalistic, to me. But 
some people prefer a more dramatic image.
Reminds me of the time a colleague and I spent a day installing and 
setting up a TV projector. We were quite pleased with ourselves until 
our American OIM said it wasn't vibrant enough. Grrr! :)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 2/15/2016 3:15 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 15/02/2016 04:47 AM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> Those are all very nice, but the colors are not very vibrant, and there
>> is not a lot of contrast between the lights and darks. Sunnier weather
>> might make for easier pictures.
>
> Yeah, having an expensive camera makes it possible to get much closer
> shots, but no camera on Earth allows me to control the Sun, sadly. :-(

On the other hand, in National Geographic you often see vibrant tropical 
scenes even when the sun is not shining.

Maybe this will help?

http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/16593/how-can-i-improve-my-photographs-taken-on-overcast-or-cloudy-days

Mike

Post a reply to this message

On 15-2-2016 5:47, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 2/14/2016 4:05 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> My fotos: let me show you dem...
>
> Those are all very nice, but the colors are not very vibrant, and there
> is not a lot of contrast between the lights and darks. Sunnier weather
> might make for easier pictures.
>

I don't agree. Imho they have the right tone and warmth coming with a 
winter overcast environment. I do not believe in vibrant colours; I find 
that the majority of the National Geographic colours are artificial and 
often lurid.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 2/15/2016 7:52 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> I don't agree. Imho they have the right tone and warmth coming with a
> winter overcast environment. I do not believe in vibrant colours; I find
> that the majority of the National Geographic colours are artificial and
> often lurid.
>
Lurid colors, eh? ;)

My favorite is the purple leaves in the adjusted "Berry" pic.

(I googled lurid to see if there was a meaning other than sexual. Colors 
*can be* lurid!)

Post a reply to this message

On 16-2-2016 0:03, dick balaska wrote:
> (I googled lurid to see if there was a meaning other than sexual. Colors
> *can be* lurid!)
>

to tell the truth, I didn't really know the violent/sexual meaning :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

> On 2/14/2016 4:05 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> My fotos: let me show you dem...
>
> Sunnier weather might make for easier pictures.
>

He's in the UK.  for them, the Sun is a newspaper, not a source of light.


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 2/16/2016 1:38 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2016-02-14 23:47, Mike Horvath a écrit :
>> On 2/14/2016 4:05 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> My fotos: let me show you dem...
>>
>> Sunnier weather might make for easier pictures.
>>
>
> He's in the UK.  for them, the Sun is a newspaper, not a source of light.
>
>
That would be funny if it wasn't true. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 13:56:21 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 2/16/2016 1:38 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> Le 2016-02-14 23:47, Mike Horvath a écrit :
>>> On 2/14/2016 4:05 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>>> My fotos: let me show you dem...
>>>
>>> Sunnier weather might make for easier pictures.
>>>
>>>
>> He's in the UK.  for them, the Sun is a newspaper, not a source of
>> light.
>>
>>
> That would be funny if it wasn't true. :-)


And here I was going to say that calling it a 'newspaper' might be 
considered a bit of a stretch. :)

It's certainly paper, but "news"?  Not from what I've seen. :)

Jim


-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message