>>> Ha! I made a 12 x 18 from an *ist-D image yesterday. Perhaps I should >>> sell prints ;-) >> >>May I disagree a little bit[1] about the quality of the picture in >>question? It may of course be the quality of my screen, but it seems >>to me that the whiter of the grey rocks are dithered crudely, they >>definition of their shapes is just rough (yes, I know the rocks were >>rough :-), > >Yep, that's exactly how they appear in film shots of the same scene. It >looks like digital pixelization but it isn't; the rocks really look like >that. I almost didn't use that particular photo for that reason.
It's the anti-digital movement again. They've been up there on those rocks, painting grey squares when they heard the *ist D was going to be getting an outing at the Camera Clinic. They did some trees and even a log cabin, but had trouble with the river. Poles placed strategically just under the surface can make a sort of chequered pattern in the stream and well it was the best they could do at such short notice. Guessing that my afternoon is going quietly? :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
