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!*****