![]() ![]() I’m not sure how it was done, but and you are the only ones that seem to have gotten a similar result to me on those wheels. I guess rather than try to adjust the whole image at once, I liked what I saw, but didn’t like those things that I couldn’t see clearly, like the spokes on the tractor wheel (big time), and the front wheels, and the bottom of the boiler. I hated the distracting pole, and once it was gone, the bottom of the image needed to be cut a little higher. ![]() ![]() From the tractor at the left, to the wheels facing me, to those parts of the boiler, I adjusted each one individually to get it to show up with some detail. ![]() I wasn’t sure if the “one size fits all” was appropriate, but I looked all over the areas, the spoked wheels, and more of the mechanism, and adjusted each one until I was pleased with the results. I could see more definite clouds when I was there. The problem with low resolution images like this one is the they tend to need a bit more “oomph” but not too much. To my eye, the sky seems a bit bland, but that is a personal taste thing. What was your reasoning for doing this? Did you feel each zone needed a different level? They don’t seem to be that different. Not being critical but you added quite a few distinct control points to increase shadow exposure rather than selecting similar areas together and using one adjustment. And I’m not sure why you increased saturation? Don’t forget, the lighter the mask, the more effect the adjustment will have. It also selected the edges of the leaves on the nearest tree more strongly than the rest of the sky. Instead of using something like micro-contrast to increase the definition of the clouds, you went for reducing the highlights and exposure, which darkened the sky and the funnel but didn’t do much for the cloud definition. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |