|
|
|
Marco Donatiello
{K:12147} 11/1/2005
|
BellissimO!
Stupendo!
Senza parole!
Anche il taglio verticale nn guasta!
Complimenti!
>ciao
|
|
|
|
Lukasz Kuczkowski
{K:14687} 11/1/2005
|
what a view! I wouild concentrate on the waterfall itself without right part and the sky
|
|
|
|
Matt Pals
{K:1722} 11/1/2005
|
A fantastic image indeed. I appreciate the dialogue you and Ann had here. You asked the question, but i think others who stumble on this gem of a photo could probably benefit from Ann's tutorial as well. Thanks to both of you for a great example of effective sharing and learning here on UF.
matt
|
|
|
|
Ann Nida
{K:45248} 11/1/2005
|
Sorry I had a computer hicup so I will contunue where I left off....
....the gradient tool to fill it. Fill and use Edit - Undo then redo it again until you get the desired graduation from top to bottom. Hold the shift key down to keep your graduation line straight. Once I've done that I zoom in and clean up around trees using the clone tool. This process can be time consuming but worth it for a nice image such as this one. I hope this helps. Have fun. Cheers - Ann :)
|
|
|
|
|
Ann Nida
{K:45248} 11/1/2005
|
I've looked at a lot of natural sky photos and have concluded that, for the most part, a sky without clouds is usually graduated to lmost no colour at the bottom. If you look at many photos you will see what I mean. This is the case for distance shots. If the sky is closer it isn't always the case. This was a really fast bang up job so it has flaws but I will use the magic wand selector to select the sky. Then I will choose as natural a blue as I think would suit the photo. Too dark makes it look too saturated and too light will make it too washed out looking. If there is lots of colour you can usually grade your sky by the amount of colour in the rest of the image. Once you have selected the area and your blue you choose
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Peterson
{K:4419} 11/1/2005
|
Ann,
I agree about the shutter speed, but unfortunately I didn't hike my tripod in with me, so I was limited in how slow I dared go. As for the sharpening all I can say is, you should see the actual negative. My HP flatbed scanner leaves a lot to be desired in it's output so the scan needed quite a bit of manipulation that made maintaining the quality a real challenge. Finally, the blue sky you added is perfect. If you don't mind me asking what's the best way to add the sky like that. I've tried a couple of different things in PS but just can't seem to get a natural looking result. Thanks for taking the time to look and comment.
Eric
|
|
|
|
|
Ann Nida
{K:45248} 11/1/2005
|
Eric this is a breathtaking waterfall with stunning colours all around it. Your composition is wonderful and the detail is superb. I think it's a tac over sharpened perhaps in my humble opinion only. I would love to see this with a slower shutter speed to make the water more misty. I hope you don't mind but I added a touch of blue sky in keeping with the lovely colours of autumn. Not to everyone's tastes so no offense intended. Lovely image and a pleasure to view. Cheers - Ann :)
|
|
|
0 
