Re: OT PS Vintage photo phun

[Paul Stenquist]

Hmmm. I like Shel's version far better than the grainy one. Although if 
you're going for "old," the grainy version looks older. Perhaps just 
because it's not as refined. The color shot is quite nice as well. If I 
had to pick based on pure aesthetics, I'd go for Shel's. But that's 
just me.
Paul
On Dec 12, 2004, at 2:36 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:

Hmmm ... perhaps a URL would be in order <LOL>
http://home.earthlink.net/~my-pics/mill.html
Shel

[Original Message]
From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12/12/2004 11:29:32 AM
Subject: Re: OT PS Vintage photo phun
I took a different approach with your pic.  Using Rob's action, I 
went for
a somewhat more conventional look, not quite sepia so much as warm 
toned,
making adjustments to hue/sat, the "film curve" and the amount of 
sepia
tone.  The lack of grain didn't bother me so much as the photo had 
plenty
of detail in it to offset the digital smoothness that you found
objectionable.  IMO, your use of the grain filter detracted from the 
final
result.  Here my thought was that, in going for an "old tyme" look, a
larger format negative would have been used, and grain intrusion would
have
been minimal or non existent.  I set the warm tone to look more like 
some
older prints I've seen, rather than the colder B&W silver prints that 
are
more contemporary.

I tried Rob's action straight from the can, but it didn't cut it for 
this
pic as far as I was concerned.

Shel

[Original Message]
From: Jostein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

OK, here goes.
My first attempt at digi-b/w. I've used Rob's action and used the
"film grain" filter in CS. The file just didn't look right with
digital smoothness, imho.
The place is "Mabry mill" in the Blue Ridge mountains.
http://www.oksne.net/paw/imgp2489.jpg
Comments appreciated.
Here's the colour original:
http://www.oksne.net/paw/imgp2489c.jpg
The coloured one looks kinda mute, but I didn't do any adjustments to
it like I would otherwise.
Jostein