«

On 8/20/2012 8:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> ‘Duck comments:
>
<snip>

>
> Peter Newman:
> On-Road-01:
> Nice rail car (caboose I suspect) on the railroad, but the contrast and
> saturation seems to be a tad over cranked to me.

And deliberately so. I was trying to make a statement about the garish
lifestyle that existed for many in the days of the caboose.

> On-Road-02:
> Nice image, but this time I have different issues. I know the D300 can
> perform better than that at ISO 800. There is too much noise and I am
> not sure if that is ISO 800 noise(which I doubt) or over sharpening in
> post. If ISO 800 noise, the noise reduction in ACR works very well now.
> If due to over sharpening, well shame on you.

I guess my eyes are getting old. I was playing with a new method of
sharpening. When I get some time I would probably redo this image as a
low-key soft focus presentation.

> On-Road-03:
> On the road, but Aaaaaggh! What were you thinking? Don’t tell us this is
> some sort of strange Newman abstraction. Sorry Peter this is just a back
> to the drawing board mess.
>
I just happened to like the way those kids were relating to their ride
on the back of that carriage. I was shooting through the windshield with
a fairly soft lens. (18 – 200). Of course, everything but the children
was converted to monochrome because the carriage had these bright red
reflectors that were distracting.

I really appreciate all comments, and the ones telling me what is wrong,
even more.

--

PeterN

On 8/20/2012 10:24 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-08-20 19:06:41 -0700, PeterN <> said:
>
>> On 8/20/2012 8:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> ‘Duck comments:
>>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> Peter Newman:
>>> On-Road-01:
>>> Nice rail car (caboose I suspect) on the railroad, but the contrast and
>>> saturation seems to be a tad over cranked to me.
>>
>> And deliberately so. I was trying to make a statement about the garish
>> lifestyle that existed for many in the days of the caboose.
>
> OK! I'll buy that.
>
>>> On-Road-02:
>>> Nice image, but this time I have different issues. I know the D300 can
>>> perform better than that at ISO 800. There is too much noise and I am
>>> not sure if that is ISO 800 noise(which I doubt) or over sharpening in
>>> post. If ISO 800 noise, the noise reduction in ACR works very well now.
>>> If due to over sharpening, well shame on you.
>>
>> I guess my eyes are getting old. I was playing with a new method of
>> sharpening.
>
> High Pass?

Nope. Double sharpening on the Luminescence channel, high threshold in
LAB. I was looking for an almost embossed effect, I send you the link
later n the week. I want to play some more.


>
>> When I get some time I would probably redo this image as a low-key
>> soft focus presentation.
>
> Hey! If you send me the NEF or an unaltered jpeg(dropbox link) via
> email, I might have an idea or two to deal with the noise and sharpen.
>
>>> On-Road-03:
>>> On the road, but Aaaaaggh! What were you thinking? Don’t tell us
>>> this is
>>> some sort of strange Newman abstraction. Sorry Peter this is just a back
>>> to the drawing board mess.
>>>
>> I just happened to like the way those kids were relating to their
>> ride on the back of that carriage. I was shooting through the
>> windshield with a fairly soft lens. (18 – 200). Of course,
>> everything but the children was converted to monochrome because the
>> carriage had these bright red reflectors that were distracting.
>
> I get where you were going with this, but I couldn't get over the issues
> my brain refused to dismiss.
>
>>
>> I really appreciate all comments, and the ones telling me what is
>> wrong, even more.
>
>


--
Peter

On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 22:06:41 -0400, PeterN
<> wrote:

>> On-Road-02:
>> Nice image, but this time I have different issues. I know the D300 can
>> perform better than that at ISO 800. There is too much noise and I am
>> not sure if that is ISO 800 noise(which I doubt) or over sharpening in
>> post. If ISO 800 noise, the noise reduction in ACR works very well now.
>> If due to over sharpening, well shame on you.
>
>I guess my eyes are getting old. I was playing with a new method of
>sharpening. When I get some time I would probably redo this image as a
>low-key soft focus presentation.

Oddly, that look - which I attributed to a "film grain" filter - is
what makes this image distinctive in my view. I like the effect.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 8/20/2012 10:24 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-08-20 19:06:41 -0700, PeterN <> said:
>
>> On 8/20/2012 8:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> ‘Duck comments:
>>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> Peter Newman:
>>> On-Road-01:
>>> Nice rail car (caboose I suspect) on the railroad, but the contrast and
>>> saturation seems to be a tad over cranked to me.
>>
>> And deliberately so. I was trying to make a statement about the garish
>> lifestyle that existed for many in the days of the caboose.
>
> OK! I'll buy that.
>
>>> On-Road-02:
>>> Nice image, but this time I have different issues. I know the D300 can
>>> perform better than that at ISO 800. There is too much noise and I am
>>> not sure if that is ISO 800 noise(which I doubt) or over sharpening in
>>> post. If ISO 800 noise, the noise reduction in ACR works very well now.
>>> If due to over sharpening, well shame on you.
>>
>> I guess my eyes are getting old. I was playing with a new method of
>> sharpening.
>
> High Pass?
>
>> When I get some time I would probably redo this image as a low-key
>> soft focus presentation.
>
> Hey! If you send me the NEF or an unaltered jpeg(dropbox link) via
> email, I might have an idea or two to deal with the noise and sharpen.
>


Check your email:

--

PeterN

On 8/23/2012 12:31 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-08-23 07:24:52 -0700, PeterN <> said:
>
>> On 8/20/2012 10:24 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2012-08-20 19:06:41 -0700, PeterN <>
>>> said:
>>>
>>>> On 8/20/2012 8:12 PM, Savageduck wrote:
>>>>> ‘Duck comments:
>>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter Newman:
>>>>> On-Road-01:
>>>>> Nice rail car (caboose I suspect) on the railroad, but the contrast
>>>>> and
>>>>> saturation seems to be a tad over cranked to me.
>>>>
>>>> And deliberately so. I was trying to make a statement about the garish
>>>> lifestyle that existed for many in the days of the caboose.
>>>
>>> OK! I'll buy that.
>>>
>>>>> On-Road-02:
>>>>> Nice image, but this time I have different issues. I know the D300 can
>>>>> perform better than that at ISO 800. There is too much noise and I am
>>>>> not sure if that is ISO 800 noise(which I doubt) or over sharpening in
>>>>> post. If ISO 800 noise, the noise reduction in ACR works very well
>>>>> now.
>>>>> If due to over sharpening, well shame on you.
>>>>
>>>> I guess my eyes are getting old. I was playing with a new method of
>>>> sharpening.
>>>
>>> High Pass?
>>>
>>>> When I get some time I would probably redo this image as a low-key
>>>> soft focus presentation.
>>>
>>> Hey! If you send me the NEF or an unaltered jpeg(dropbox link) via
>>> email, I might have an idea or two to deal with the noise and sharpen.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Check your email:
>
> Got it!
> Results to follow.
> ...but now I understand the problem you were trying to fix. My solution
> might be a little different.
>

I may have sent the wrong RAW file, but they were all taken about the
same time.

--
Peter