2 and 3 are great. Must try HDR at some point.
dsc_1972 Senior Member 458 posts Joined Oct 2006 Location: Edinburgh, UK More info | Nov 25, 2006 13:51 | #16 |
Seaboarder Senior Member 505 posts Joined Feb 2006 Location: Hilton of Cadboll, Highlands of Scotland More info | Nov 30, 2006 04:13 | #17 Lesmac is correct in what he says. Paul
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 30, 2006 04:26 | #18 I'd rather see these processed in PS using layers, HDR just gives something to the images which looks wrong but compositionally they are great. http://natureimmortal.blogspot.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Littleben Member 192 posts Likes: 3 Joined Mar 2006 Location: Whitley bay, newcastle. More info | Sometimes you can tell an image is HDR, sometimes you can't. When I do it, I tend to use -1 / 0 / +1, that way it looks more natural. Back after about 6 Years, once again being drawn into the world of photography.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
GreatNorthWood Member 142 posts Joined Jun 2006 Location: Crystal Palace, UK More info | Nov 30, 2006 07:31 | #20 I love No. 1. 350D | 24-105 L IS | Sigma 55-200 | 50mm F1.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2704 guests, 139 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||