On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:28:17 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

This is an example of what I was talking about the other day.

This is an uncorrected image:

http://www.swsports.org/images/PC219359.JPG

This is the corrected image:

http://www.swsports.org/images/Untitled14.jpg

This is uncropped and uncorrected:

http://www.swsports.org/images/PC219295.JPG

This is cropped and corrected:

http://www.swsports.org/images/Untitled11.jpg

In both the cropping helped. And in both your initial composition was as good as it
could have been given the time and circumstances.

When I use Photoshop Elements, and let it do the 'Auto Fix', I get results that look
'too' fixed, which is what the first seagull looks like. I usually have to go in and
reduce the amount of 'fixing' it does. I liked the original seagull, with the wing
out, better than the 'corrected' version. A 'little' brighter might have helped, but
the corrected version just seems too bright.

On the second one, the cropping was great, but the 'correcting' washed out the bottom
two birds too much. I liked the 'shadow effect' in the first shot, without the
'enhanced' sky and overexposed water.
--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:10:06 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 08:04:33 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 11:28:17 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

This is an example of what I was talking about the other day.

This is an uncorrected image:

http://www.swsports.org/images/PC219359.JPG

This is the corrected image:

http://www.swsports.org/images/Untitled14.jpg

This is uncropped and uncorrected:

http://www.swsports.org/images/PC219295.JPG

This is cropped and corrected:

http://www.swsports.org/images/Untitled11.jpg

In both the cropping helped. And in both your initial composition was as good as it
could have been given the time and circumstances.

The first one wasn't cropped - I only took out the wing.


I would have said you cropped out the wing. But, it's semantics.

When I use Photoshop Elements, and let it do the 'Auto Fix', I get results that look
'too' fixed, which is what the first seagull looks like. I usually have to go in and
reduce the amount of 'fixing' it does. I liked the original seagull, with the wing
out, better than the 'corrected' version. A 'little' brighter might have helped, but
the corrected version just seems too bright.

I don't work with Photoshop, but if it has a histogram evaluation,
download both and take a look.

On the second one, the cropping was great, but the 'correcting' washed out the bottom
two birds too much. I liked the 'shadow effect' in the first shot, without the
'enhanced' sky and overexposed water.

Ah, see I disagree. On my monitor, the original image is way too
bright and the "shadow" effect of the first is a distortion - take
another look.

I meant to say 'silhouette', not shadow. I see the pic 'PC219295' as being much
darker than 'Untitled11'. In the first, the sky is barely visible. In the second, the
enhancement has made the sky visible. I like the first one better, without the
enhancement.

Have you calibrated your monitor?

Only with my eyeballs, which were calibrated while attending the Engineer Officer
Advanced Course.

--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:42:53 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:02:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

Have you calibrated your monitor?

Only with my eyeballs, which were calibrated while attending the Engineer Officer
Advanced Course.

I only asked because of the sharp comment. That image is razor edged
even under binary expansion - almost zero clipping and no halos.

It's not hard to calibrate the monitor - there should be a routine in
the Dell software that will allow for calibration.

I apologize for any sharpness in my comment. I sure didn't mean to be sharp. Sorry.
--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:02:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

Have you calibrated your monitor?

Only with my eyeballs, which were calibrated while attending the Engineer
Officer
Advanced Course.

I only asked because of the sharp comment. That image is razor edged
even under binary expansion - almost zero clipping and no halos.

It's not hard to calibrate the monitor - there should be a routine in
the Dell software that will allow for calibration.

Watch the language, Tom. It's the holiday season.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 13:02:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

Have you calibrated your monitor?

Only with my eyeballs, which were calibrated while attending the Engineer
Officer
Advanced Course.

I only asked because of the sharp comment. That image is razor edged
even under binary expansion - almost zero clipping and no halos.

It's not hard to calibrate the monitor - there should be a routine in
the Dell software that will allow for calibration.

I have never seen any such software from Dell for monitor calibration.

Do you have any links for recommended programs, including possible freeware?