Thanks Jack. Yes, I was a bit conservative on the sharpening and contrast. It's at ISO 800, and I didn't want to accentuate the noise, but I'm going to revisit it. Noisy prints are somehow nicer than noisy web images. Perhaps it's because we're used to seeing grain in a print. Paul On May 5, 2007, at 12:28 PM, Jack Davis wrote:
> I certainly see what your point. In the interest of more sharply > defining the markings, I MIGHT bump the contrast/saturation slightly > and add a smidge of sharpening. > > Jack > --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'm not sure how I feel about this shot, but it might be a good one >> for my nature center gallery. I passed it up the first time I >> reviewed the day's shooting, but looked at it again today. It's not a >> >> great bird pic, but it might be a nice nature center shot. What I >> mean by that is that it shows the habitat and IDs the bird. People >> who love the nature center (and it has some rabid fans) might like >> something like this. By the way, an ID on the bird would be nice. >> Save me pulling out my book. And we have so many people here who >> really know birds. I can identify only a handful without a book. >> Anyway, here he is: >> >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5931913&size=lg >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
