brusby
Well-known
Very nice improvement in shadow detail. Definitely going in the right direction.No, no, no, I appreciate your taking the time and making the effort. I'll fire up ART with the RAW's and see what is there. I just hate editing. Lazy. ;o) Sometimes I think if it were not for fast food I would have died long ago. If I could get muffaletta here I'd be a blimp. Muffaletta, man, that is ambrosia. And I can make a good Wop Salad for it but the meats are all over 100 miles away and the bread doubtful. OK, ART time.
OK, how is this for a first try. Converted in ART, reduced in size in GIMP
View attachment 4854444
How would I analyze this if it were my photo? I always try to be hyper critical. So, I would think about what I'd likely see in the shadows if I were standing there when the photo was taken. And I believe a bit more detail would be apparent.
Our human eye-brain system is so amazing that we almost always see some detail in even the darkest places. So, if the goal is to make the photo a close approximation of what we actually see, then a little more detail would be in order. Trying to approach reality doesn't need to be the goal of every photo. But learning how to get close is an excellent exercise for achieving control of the photo medium.
For a simple exercise, maybe make it a point to look around you at the darkest areas, paying attention to the amount of detail you typically see in the shadows. In almost all cases, even in very low light and also in very contrasty scenes, you'll likely see some detail in even the darkest places. And I'll bet it is exceedingly rare to see many, if any, large expanses that are completely devoid of detail. It almost never happens, especially outdoors on bright sunlit days like in your photos. That's why it is disconcerting to me and many others when that occurs in photos.
Again, just giving some info to consider, not suggesting this approach needs to be adopted by you or anyone else.
Last edited: