| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/03/2006 01:03:37 PM · #26 |
No, I pulled it from the submission just to verify it was really there an not an illusion. I didn't check the original.
My +70/-70 contrast/brightness was also from the submission. I'll have to look at the original.
EDIT: Nope. The original does not display the same halo with the contrast/brightness. The halo is a PP artifact.
Message edited by author 2006-10-03 13:05:46.
|
|
|
|
10/03/2006 01:08:03 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
No, I pulled it from the submission just to verify it was really there an not an illusion. I didn't check the original.
My +70/-70 contrast/brightness was also from the submission. I'll have to look at the original. |
Oh, c'mon doc: I am saying the haloing is NOT there in the ORIGINAL. Of COURSE it is there in the edited version, and most likely it IS a result of wide radius USM. What I'm taking exception to is the folks that think it's already IN the original; using normal processing techniques I can't bring it out of the original at all. But for sure the wide radius USM will do the trick I bet.
R.
Edit to add: see, that's what I am saying man, gimme some credit!
Message edited by author 2006-10-03 13:08:37. |
|
|
|
10/03/2006 01:35:27 PM · #28 |
haha, is that what you meant when you said "the haloing in the original is an optical illusion"?
The Bear has bite...
I stand totally corrected. The trouble is, now that I've met you, I know the exact tone of your voice that you wrote that in. :)
|
|
|
|
10/03/2006 04:17:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
haha, is that what you meant when you said "the haloing in the original is an optical illusion"?
The Bear has bite...
I stand totally corrected. The trouble is, now that I've met you, I know the exact tone of your voice that you wrote that in. :) |
You stand more than corrected, you stand flogged with a wet noodle for trying to undermine my credibility in the community.
Can you detect the tone of voice for THAT statement? jejeje�
R.
Message edited by author 2006-10-03 16:17:30. |
|
|
|
10/03/2006 11:56:24 PM · #30 |
I will also stand corrected. I looked at the original at home tonight and I do not see the haloing. I suspect either I compared it to a partially processed picture or maybe my eyes were weary from sitting in front of PC too long. Or maybe I saw the lighter area in water on both and thought it was all in original.
I do know that I did compare, but I did my last save for web 5 minutes before submission deadline...so who knows what I saw! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/22/2025 07:39:26 PM EDT.
