From: "frank theriault" >Not that partial desaturation is > bad, but when "reality" (such as it is) works, why tamper?
Frank: Absolutely! It's a great photo as is. My "interesting possibilities" remark comes from unbridled enthusiasm to try new things, but I can temper that ;-). Actually, I don't think this thread would have started if I hadn't misread Christian's post. And I apologize for that. Moreover, I wrongly attributed his post. And I apologize for that too. Cheers, Christine ----- Original Message ----- From: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 12:16 PM Subject: Re: PESO - Effective Advertising! > On Feb 8, 2008 12:41 PM, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I don't have anything against artificial desaturation, if it's >> appropriate and done well, but I agree that in this case, its occurrence >> *naturally* is one of the things that makes this photo cool. > > I've been trying to formulate a response to the "desaturate" train of > thought, but I think my point has already been made. > > There's ~just~ enough colour in the stonework that one knows it's > "naturally" captured, and I prefer that to desaturating selected > portions of this particular image. Not that partial desaturation is > bad, but when "reality" (such as it is) works, why tamper? > > ;-) > > Thanks to everyone who commented! > > cheers, > frank > > > -- > "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
