Gonz is onto something when he points at the harsh bokeh. So now I wonder:
Is there anything I can do to make it less harsh in Phootoshop (Elements 3)?
Gaussian Blur is one obvious answer. It helps, but it does not take it right
where I want. 
Does anybody have some input on this? 
The picture is here
http://www.photosight.org/photo.php?photoid=35892&ref=author
If anybody feels like playing with a larger version, please give me a hint
and I'll send the file directly. 

Judging from other examples, it looks like I will face the same problem now
and then with this lens combo.


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gonz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 9. mai 2006 06:39
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: PESO: Common Redshank minding it's own business (new
> enablement)
> 
> Nice pic, though I sure wish the bokeh was more like Pentax's!
> 
> 
> 
> Tim Øsleby wrote:
> > I've enabled myself with another crappy lens. A Tamron 300/2,8 adaptall.
> Ok,
> > it is not crappy, but it is old, and has a lot off what the seller
> called
> > patina. What's really nice is that it balances perfectly with the DS
> when
> > using the AF converter. It’s a fast lens, so the auto focus is speedy.
> > I feel enabled! :-D
> >
> > http://www.photosight.org/photo.php?photoid=35892&ref=author
> > *istDS, Tamron 300/2,8 + Pentax AF 1,7x TC, 400 ISO raw, f:4, 1/500s.
> > Converted in RSP.
> >
> > This Common Redshank allowed me to go pretty close. I believe I was
> about 5m
> > away. After a while I went for a lower shooting angle. And while I was
> doing
> > my thing, it went on doing its thing; the evening toilet, brushing its
> > feathers ;-)
> > It was very sweet.
> >
> > Gratulations and/or comments are appreciated.
> >
> >
> > Tim
> > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
> >
> > Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds
> > (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)
> >
> >
> >
> 




Reply via email to