Alan Browne <alan.browne_at_FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
news:EHozc.52043$G3.1070215_at_wagner.videotron.net:
>
> Obviously the sun would be blown out. I measured incident, dome
> down to camera and then closed 1/2 stop (in shutter speed). From
> there I bracketet down in 2/3 stop (shutter speed) increments for
> these 4 shots. (As scanned, reduced in size and USM'd, no changes
> to levels or color).
>
> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/June04Mix0005.jpg
> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/June04Mix0006.jpg
> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/June04Mix0008.jpg
> http://www.aliasimages.com/images/June04Mix0009.jpg
>
> I prefer 0005, even then the 'darker' leaves appeared more yellow
> (transparent) in 'real' life.
>
> 28-70 f/2.8 at a widish FL; E100GX; f/11 around 1/125.
0005 or 0009, I'm leaning towards 0009. The sunburst is the primary
subject of the image, the eye-catcher, and the deeper contrast of 0009
enhances this a bit more. But yes, the color of the leaves is better in
0005.
In 0009 the flare jumps out a bit more too, but buried in the leaves
as it is this is hardly a major bad point.
Bug in the sky in 0005?
- Al.
--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net
| 
