Regardless of the technical qualities, I like option B best. Why: when I
opened it, the first thing my eye spotted was the chain. Probably
because it is actually the only contrasty object that is in focus. Apart
from that, the monkey is fading into the background, which also gives it
a special flavour.
Groeten,
Vic
Fernando Terrazzino wrote:
Anyone that knows b&w and have some spare time to help me...
I'm playing around here with some old scans that I have from a trip to
Thailand, and found this photo that I like but didn't quite get good
exposure (bright light in the back, no flash to fill-in, yadda, yadda,
yadda...). Basically the background is somehow overexposed and the
subject is underexposed. Anyway, while I wait to send some day the rest
of my stuff to Canada, I thought about playing around with this bad
print scans, hoping to apply the same process to a better future
negative scan.
So here I am, decided to try a b&w version to hide some defects of the
photo and end up with 4 versions. I kinda have my personal choice but
would like to listen some input from a more knowledgeable audience.
Here's the link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/72057594064899026/
you'll find 4 b&w version, plus an attempt to restore some color (best I
could do, with diff. layers for highlight and shadows, but don't like it
anyway) and the original(just for demonstration purposes).
Your vote? A, B, C or D?
Thanks
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just Search. Find! http://search.sympatico.msn.ca/default.aspx The
new MSN Search! Check it out!
