HDR - first try

Yes. I killed it, leaving only the better one:
http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/135708427

 

For the record, here's the two extreme's overlaid with 50% transparency
on the bright one (and some curves and levels):
http://edgehill.net/temp-/13477432-43-overlay.jpg
-that's not an approach I take often but it seems to work OK here.

 

Yes. I killed it, leaving only the better one:

Thanks, David. Excellent image, although too saturated for my taste,
particularly the green. Wouldn't have known it was HDR unless you'd said,
which is how it should be (for me).

Cheers,
David

 

That may be a very famous machine indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS

If you have any more memorabilia, particularly such excellent
photographs, and particularly with some of the people involved in 'em,
I know a museum curator who would be very interested.

I remember reading about that neurological work when I was working at
DEC in the 1970's. I had a short gig doing software support on MUMPS
while I was there. (mostly it was left to smarter people)

 

I don't think there was MUMPS done on that machine, but I don't really know.

Apparently the LINC from the Eye and Ear Infirmary is at the MIT Museum.

But I only have a couple of other photos from father's work, and they're not
particularly interesting. Said curator is welcome to that photo if they're
intertested. (I'll look again, but I don't think there's anything else.)

 

OK, thanks. I'll settle for sending him the link to your photo.
He already has a sort-of working PDP-7. If your father's machine were
not the one used to develop the first MUMPS there is not much point in
looking any harder.

 

Thanks for that. I've been off the photography for about a year; a cataract
operation in one eye has me having different color balances left (warm) and
right (bluer) and unsure about colors. Yuck. But I'm fed up with not doing
photography. I did gunch up the saturation/vibrance, so it's good to know I
overdid it.

(Maybe I'll rethink the saturation/vibrance again, leaving yet another dead
link in cyberspace.)

But, uh, sorry for the too many subjunctives in there. "This is an image
that I would have thought might have needed to be HDR" or the like. Which is
to say, it's not an HDR image. It is hit fairly hard with negative exposure
compenstaion and highlight rescuing to get the highlights more reasonable
and then a lot of fill light to open up the shadows. But it's just one 5D2
ISO 200 frame.

 

Please don't take this wrong. Try working in BW until you get
comfortable again with color.

 

Thanks. I don't think fill flash would have covered a lot of area,
however. Also I was pretty far off shooting with the 135mm.

 

Not sure on the overall value of that exercise... I really want to play
with multiple images to get a broader range of light reasonably displayed.

 

On 2011-06-19 19:38 , Robert Coe wrote:
: > On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 17:12:56 -0400, Alan Browne
: > : On 2011-06-19 16:39 , David J. Littleboy wrote:
: > :> http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/135708427/large
: > :>
: > :> I was worried that the loss of contrast would reduce the "pop", but that
: > :> seems to be a good thing here. Note that this opens up the shadows in the
: > :> background at the right.
: > :
: > : Better. The "harsh" top is easier on the eyes and the lightened shadows
: > : improve it as well.
: > :
: > : But original capture with fill would have been preferable, of course (or
: > : wait until the best time of day...).
: > :
: > : Assuming you left your camera on Japan time, then I think you took that
: > : around 15:00 local. The next morning might have been better light
: > : (unless it's in the shadow of a building or something.
: >
: > David's posts indicate that he's 9 hours ahead of Greenwich, so the picture
: > was taken around 5:45 PM in Greenwich, or 1:45 PM here. The sun doesn't go on
: > daylight time, so call it 12:45. We're near the eastern edge of the time zone,
: > so our time lags the sun a bit, but even so, it's clear that the monument
: > faces somewhat west of north. So so having its face catch the morning sun on
: > Memorial Day, even at sunrise, seems a bit problematical (although a little
: > less problematical now, three weeks later). Late afternoon looks like a better
: > bet.
:
: Tokyo is 13 hours ahead of EDST. eg. when it's 02:00 there, it's 13:00,
: the day before, here (eastern seaboard).

Yup, pretty much what I thought I said: 13:45 + 4 hr = 17:45 (Greenwich);
17:45 + 9 hr = 26:45 = 02:45 the next day (Tokyo). And 02:45 Tokyo time is
within a few minutes of when the Exif data tells us David's picture was taken.
Am I missing something?

Bob

 

: On 6/21/2011 6:35 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
: >
: >>> Yes. I killed it, leaving only the better one:
: >>> http://www.pbase.com/davidjl/image/135708427
: >>>
: >>> --
: >>> David J. Littleboy
: >>> Tokyo, Japan
: >>
: >> Thanks, David. Excellent image, although too saturated for my taste,
: >> particularly the green.
: >
: > Thanks for that. I've been off the photography for about a year; a cataract
: > operation in one eye has me having different color balances left (warm) and
: > right (bluer) and unsure about colors. Yuck. But I'm fed up with not doing
: > photography. I did gunch up the saturation/vibrance, so it's good to know I
: > overdid it.
: >
: > (Maybe I'll rethink the saturation/vibrance again, leaving yet another dead
: > link in cyberspace.)
: >
: >> Wouldn't have known it was HDR unless you'd said, which is how it should
: >> be (for me).
: >
: > But, uh, sorry for the too many subjunctives in there. "This is an image
: > that I would have thought might have needed to be HDR" or the like. Which is
: > to say, it's not an HDR image. It is hit fairly hard with negative exposure
: > compenstaion and highlight rescuing to get the highlights more reasonable
: > and then a lot of fill light to open up the shadows. But it's just one 5D2
: > ISO 200 frame.
: >
:
: Please don't take this wrong. Try working in BW until you get
: comfortable again with color.

Color balance is highly subjective under the best of circumstances. Just find
the color temperature that looks best to the right eye and the c.t. that looks
best to the left eye, and split the difference. ;^)

Bob

 

Nope. I got it backwards!

 

Well, it doesn't have halos.
I'm surprised it worked pretty well here.

 

Thanks for that. I've been off the photography for about a year; a

It's so personal, David. I've set the saturation on my Nikon to
"Neutral", and my new Sony Bravia TV to "Theatre" mode, and am much
preferring the results to most of what I see. The colours look natural to
me. Colour balance doesn't worry me much, and I would have thought that
the brain would equalise any differences. Oh well! I may be due for a
similar op in a few years, I am told.

I was saying it didn't look like an HDR shot, so my feeling was correct.
Thanks for the confirmation. Appreciate the point about highlight rescue.

Cheers,
David (Edinburgh)

 

Works for me ;-)