Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="brokensword, post: 368541, member: 3486"] I agree and surmised as much; styles differ, tastes subjective. I was showing what can be done with the Levels slider in that detail that looks lost can be found. Cameras have not surpassed or equaled the DR level of our eyes, yet, so most of them bias the picture either toward not over exposing highlights or giving the most shadow detail. And I bet you can see more detail the day you took this pic(s) than your pic shows. But, I understand. *double checking; better cameras can give you about 15 stops of DR whereas the eye can see 20, so any pic you take is going to lose detail (compared to what you see) in the shadows. Add to this that when you print, you're only getting 5-7 stops, so both computer/camera and print aren't ever going to give you exactly what you see the day you took the pic. But that's why art is art; there is no wrong, just perception. GIMP IS a lot better now, almost as good as PS, but as noted, the interface is different and would take some 'unlearning/relearning'. I've used it and it'll probably be my go-to once CS6 can't be used (or I'll maybe look into Pixelmator as that too has gained a lot of PS-ability). I'm viewing on my tv as of this moment and my comp usually shows a lot better, but again, was just illustrating the technique more than anything. I still like the pics for framing and composition. You're quite correct to use a monitor which shows more closely how your art will look printed. Spent more than my fair share of time trying to coordinate pigment colors of inks and phosphor colors of light on a screen. Even calibrated screens. Once you have your profile though, make sure you keep it safe! Michael [/QUOTE]

Verification