Re: PF gallery on 08-12-17

Gregory <fyrframe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> · Wed, 16 Aug 2017 07:37:11 -0700



    Something similar happened to me (during my very early days of
      digital) during a field shoot of a horse owner sitting on the
      horse for a portrait. She had a kind of teal blue shirt. When the
      images were displayed, her shirt was not teal anymore, it was just
      a lighter blue. Nothing I could do     ( during my Photoshop 3.0
      days) enabled me to change the shirt back to it's original color.
      I gave up. She was pleased with image.
    When I worked in television, one common understanding was that
      Green 7-up cans where painted with a very special screening ink so
      that no one could duplicate the color exactly. I never tried to
      prove their claims.
    Gregory Gig Harbor, WA.

    
    On 8/15/2017 1:07 PM, photoroy4@xxxxxxx
      wrote:

    
            The camera doesn't always capture the truth. I was
          changing the numbering system of my camera and I took a test
          shot of my dimly lit clothes closet. The original scene was
          dark with a green plaid shirt visible in the middle. The 18%
          exposure jpg was bright with colors and looked much better
          than the real scene thru my eyes.
            In another incident:
            I took some pictures of a purple magenta sky at day
          break. When looking back over these images the jpgs looked too
          colorful to me. (the RAW files all looked dull)Since it was a
          while back I couldn't remember what I thought the original
          scene looked like. The old adage jumped into my mind close
          down 1/3 of a stop to "underexpose"  the slide film for the
          best color. Now I don't know whether these day break jpg
          images represents the real color or not.
        Roy
        
          Gregory,

            
            yup … there were just lying there. Trouble is that right now
            I can’t remember where I saw them.

            I’m “always” looking for stone afoot as it is a “theme” that
            I have used over the last few years as the 

            “cover” image of the Facebook site of PhotoForum. Replacing
            as I find new ones. 

            
            In case you are interested I uploaded the original,
            unmodified other than size, at this location:

            
            andpph.com/2017-pix/2107-stones-original.jpg

            
            Andy

            
        -----Original Message-----

          From: Andrew Davidhazy <andpph@xxxxxxx>

          To: PhotoForum educational network
          <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

          Sent: Sat, Aug 12, 2017 2:09 pm

          Subject:  Re: PF gallery on 08-12-17

          
          Gregory,

          
          yup … there were just lying there. Trouble is that right now I
          can’t remember where I saw them.

          I’m “always” looking for stone afoot as it is a “theme” that I
          have used over the last few years as the 

          “cover” image of the Facebook site of PhotoForum. Replacing as
          I find new ones. 

          
          In case you are interested I uploaded the original, unmodified
          other than size, at this location:

          
          andpph.com/2017-pix/2107-stones-original.jpg

          
          Andy

          
          > On Aug 12, 2017, at 12:32 PM, Gregory <fyrframe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
          wrote:

          > 

          > Thanks for the updates Andrew.

          > 

          > I am curious about your image "Stones Underfoot." Are
          those rocks naturally laying there? Regardless of your sat
          bump, there is an amazing amount of color in the rocks and I
          can't imagine why. I call these shots natural art or found
          art.

          > 

          > Thanks.

          > 

          > Gregory Gig Harbor, WA.

          > 

          
    -- 

      Gregory Gig Harbor, WA.