| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/12/2002 12:56:18 AM · #1 |
I'm curious as to how harsh the shadow in my entry from last week shows on folk's monitors... I recieved comments that the shadow in the bowl was harsh, but on my (calabrated) monitor, it's actually rather soft showing alot of detail. The shadow to the right is darker but still shows detail throughout. Is that what shows up for you?
I'm wondering if I should throw my monitor out of calabration when I'm getting my photo ready for submission.
PS ~ I'm not complaining about anything here, just wondering about how this looks on other monitors... I don't vote at work because those monitors are so far out of wack.
* This message has been edited by the author on 8/12/2002 12:57:25 AM. |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 01:00:28 AM · #2 |
Looks fine on my monitor... there is some detail in the shadow. I calibrated using the Photoshop calibration tool.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
08/12/2002 01:18:47 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 01:27:40 AM · #4 |
| i think you sharpened it too much |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 01:45:12 AM · #5 |
I agree, you went a little crazy on the sharpening tool.
T |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 01:55:09 AM · #6 |
I can see into the shadows OK. Maybe you should post a less-sharpened version for comparison.
* This message has been edited by the author on 8/12/2002 1:54:28 AM. |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 02:51:17 AM · #7 |
I see the details fine on my monitor as well. I've seen comments on other sites (photosig, etc.) where people have said that the shadows were jet black,
example of John's Come November
when they actually show lots of detail.
It makes me mad because people vote photos down for something that their monitor isn't showing. Get calibrated y'all. |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 03:25:03 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
I recieved comments that the shadow in the bowl was harsh, but on my (calabrated) monitor, it's actually rather soft showing alot of detail. The shadow to the right is darker but still shows detail throughout. Is that what shows up for you?
Note Harsh shadow ... not lacks detail... my monitor is fairly well calibrated and I put it out to check your image... by harsh I assume what is meant is the sharp edge which is visiable even when my monitor is at 100 brightness (default/calibrated is 40)... I don't think gamma would have changed the image much either... It's more to do with time of day and weather than monitor calibration.
On a side note:
My co-workers monitor which sits next to mine shows quite different colors than mine on occasion, even though it's perfectly calibrated in adobe gamma ... but shades of gray (tones) are the same..
|
|
|
|
08/12/2002 06:25:14 AM · #9 |
Im one of the ones that said the shadow was too strong. I didnt mean it lacked detail especially (although the larger shadow on the right does in my opinion). I just meant that overall it was the first thing in the picture that my eye was drawn to.
Just try squinting at the picture to get a sense of where the main forms and colours are. The thing that most strongly hits me when I do that is the large shadow to the right of the mortar.
JOhn |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 08:33:16 AM · #10 |
Disclaimer : I'm asking this to learn, not complain :) Thanks to everyone for the comments. I'll post an unsharpened version on pbase asap (probably after work) per the earlier posts. Now back to the regularly scheduled post...
Floyd, The shadow is a bad thing? This tool was used by desert dwellers, and I kind of choose the time of day to help show that. I thought the shadow "added" to the shot. I think I'm missing the definition of 'harsh'... when I squint as you recommended, I lose the detail and the shadow takes on the main focus, but if there was no shadow, there wouldn't be any real contrast. I felt the shadow was almost mandatory to show the mortar had hieght and was not just part of the ground.
Thanks again to everyone :) I think this shot is teaching me something I was oblivious to :)
Originally posted by floyd:
Im one of the ones that said the shadow was too strong. I didnt mean it lacked detail especially (although the larger shadow on the right does in my opinion). I just meant that overall it was the first thing in the picture that my eye was drawn to.
Just try squinting at the picture to get a sense of where the main forms and colours are. The thing that most strongly hits me when I do that is the large shadow to the right of the mortar.
JOhn
|
|
|
|
08/12/2002 08:59:30 AM · #11 |
Ok I dont think I explained what I meant very well.
Your subject for the photo was both apt and interesting. And your idea about using the light to show the context of where this would be used is interesting - not something I'd picked up on.
I guess what Im trying to say is that to make the best of these elements I would have preferred that shadow to be less the focus of attention.
I would have liked my eye to have started on the mortar or pestle and then proceeded on to the shadow and/or the background. My purpose in suggesting you squint at the shot was to show you where the main focus of the picture was - and like me you saw the shadow. The mortar gets a little lost against the background - just because they're similar colours and textures.
So no I dont think the shadow was a bad thing - especially not now that you've explained why it was in the shot. But I think perhaps it should it should have been moved further round and behind the mortar. Perhaps moving the camera down closer to the ground and making the shadow stretch out behind. From that angle a tight depth of field might have helped isolate the subject from the background more clearly (sharp focus on the mortar contrasting against a blurry background) and that might have lead the eye a little better.
Of course you would have scored even lower if you took my advice - the voters dont like shallow DOF shots much! <grin>
John |
|
|
|
08/12/2002 09:17:56 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by floyd:
Of course you would have scored even lower if you took my advice - the voters dont like shallow DOF shots much! <grin>
John
LoL :) Good point... I see what you're saying now pretty well, thanks... My camera won't let me play much with depth of field...
As per the earlier 'too sharp' discussion, here is the original, unsharpened, image... It's also unresized so keep that in mind :)
While I'm at it, here are some outtakes... Please feel free to tell me what a putz I am for not having gone with one of them :) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 09:49:36 PM EDT.
