> > > >http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/WildAnimalPark/IMGP5226.jpg > >Brutal and other comments are welcome as always. >
Cotty wrote: > Interesting composition. Camera shake evident though. I wonder what is the indication? I know it is not ultimately sharp - but I am not sure if it is because of the lens' limited resolution, because of me not focusing well, or the camera shake as you suggested. The photo was taken at 240mm focal length at 1/500, handheld. However, this is a crop - and what you see is just ~25% less than the actual pixel size (see the -5 version in the last link). P. J. Alling wrote: > I know it's very conventional of me but I'd have framed the it with > the eye another 1/5th of the distance towards the top of the frame I think I know what you are talking about (at least I hope so), but it doesn't seem to work in this case. Something like this? http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/WildAnimalPark/IMGP5226-3.jpg pnstenquist wrote: > Good one. I might burn in the bright areas just a wee bit with a big, > soft brush in the midrange setting. That was a good idea. Here is the result (if I understood correctly what you meant by midrange) http://www.komkon.org/~igor/PHOTOS/WildAnimalPark/IMGP5226-5.jpg (at first I almost did much more burning, but then I realized that it is important for this picture to have a part being this bright) Igor PS. Thanks to all who looked, and especially for the interesting comments. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
