Chal ginger Bridges 4 27 PS

[ginger_55]

Thanks for the comments, everyone. While you all were posting, I was redoing, from the beginning, the bridge shot. This is what I did, and it was as little as possible. Hadn't read yet about going for broke with cropping, etc, so I did little trying not to do wrong.

cleaned the dust spots, used levels slightly and manually only, desaturated to minus 34, sharpened with Rutt's advanced method. I saved the color and converted to black and white. On the first black and white conversion, I used 0% red and 100% green, on the second conversion, I used 0% red, 108% green and -8% blue. Then I upped the black to 2 in selective colors.

I thought I had the RAW version as brought up, but I am not sure, so I am going to post these and go find the RAW version and add it to this. I have not messed with the colors, in the colored version at all, I did not use the highlight/shadow tool at all anywhere, I kept that info, and that is what I did.

Please comment. I would rather use a different photo than crop this one. Let me see what you all think. No frame either. ginger, thanks for the comments you all made while I was working. (It is almost 3 o'clock PM, I have not had a thing to eat, guess I will do that while I am waiting for someone to comment.)

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/20671139-L.jpg


First black and white conversion. red 0, green 100, blue whatever it was, 0 I guess.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/20671141-L.jpg


Second conversion. Since I subtracted 8 from the blue, I added it to the green to make the green 108, with the red still 0 (I did everything in this for a reason based on what I have read on this subject in the past.) Based on standard practice by Andy, et al, I did add black from selective colors, but less than usual as it didn't seem to need much or tolerate much, so I added all of 2.

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/20671136-L.jpg


Thank you all for spending any time to help me with this. Eric, I had your response from before printed out so that I could not make the same mistakes. I thought since the contrast was probably lowered that the sharpening was crucial, so I got out Rutt's info on the advanced method using layers and was careful in that .

ginger

[ginger_55]

This is what I started with in jpg form as brought up from RAW. Doesn't look much different to me from what I ended up with? Gosh, I am hungry.

Ginger
http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/20672630-L.jpg

[ginger_55]

http://gingerSnap.smugmug.com/photos/20342474-L.jpg

Have a good day, everyone. Cross with the light, smile alot, good luck.

ginger

[DoctorIt]

When I was thinking extreme, I was thinking something like this:

[ginger_55]

With or without the dust spots?

thanks, g

[ginger_55]

you changed it.

It's not bad.

g thanks

[DoctorIt]

man i hate attachments, but it was quick and dirty - now my comments.

I still really don't like the top of your image. So I chopped it off, and I know you were against that. I'm a fighter, so I'll keep at it. There's too many artifacts and nasty crap up there. Aiming right at the sun showed us every bit of everything you ahve on your lens and sensor, just too much to hope to fix.

I did notice the X's are gone though... still don't know what those were.

[ginger_55]

A filter on photoshop on lighting tecniques under Render

g

[DoctorIt]

you changed it.

It's not bad.

g thanksyup, sorry, attachments are not my usual thing, so i blew it the first time around.

[bfjr]

Hi Ginger
1st Thank you for your comment on Steve's thread about my entry. It's actually my 1st at the challenge. :clap

Now image. I think if it was me I would have walked right up to one of those girders with a wide angle and shot low and straight up to try and capture the patterns and repetions within. Then brought into PS and crop so that girder showed leading away from viewer and into forever. I'm sure you've seen images of this sort of thing and can be very dramatic. I hope I've explained clearly enough, and of course you know I don't have clue as to what I'm doing here on Earth!!! :lol4 :lol

[ginger_55]

Hi Ginger
1st Thank you for your comment on Steve's thread about my entry. It's actually my 1st at the challenge. :clap

I hope I've explained clearly enough, and of course you know I don't have clue as to what I'm doing here on Earth!!! :lol4 :lol
Is that what you would have told the cop who arrested you for parking on the narrow, and it is, bridge. You pay a huge fine if your car breaks down on the bridge. Maybe you could get away with it if you had some kind of major accident. But don't threaten to jump, I think that gets jail time.

I took that from inside of the van when Bill was driving.

ginger:1drink

[snapapple]

I'm here for a few minutes. My computer has been totally whacked out. The techs keep telling me I have to wipe it clean and do a reinstall of Windows. What a nightmare! For now, I have my internet working and have backed up all of my data in prep for the clean install. So here's my two cents worth.

I like the color version best, the less saturated one. The reason being that the B&W version seems too flat right in the middle. The grey is just flat. The color version seems to have some depth to the sky.

As far as a pattern or repitition goes, I don't think it's very strong.

Technically, the light speckles are just too distracting. I actually liked the first version better. I liked the lighting effects. They seemed to emphasize the pattern. I would have kept the top one and not the lower one. That lower one does not look natural since there is no bright light there. Even if you clean up all the dust spots, there still seems to be a lot of light reflection on top of the black areas of the steel girders. The black and white version might be easier to clean up in this respect, but the bright light still grays out the sky right in the middle.

I hope you don't find this critique too harsh. I'm just throwing in my two cents. I really think you might come up with a stronger pattern or repetition for the challenge. This one just doesn't do it for me. You know I love your work in general, so it's not personal.