Quote:
Originally Posted by codemonkey
Thanks Mike :-)
I always take your feedback on board and you're almost always right. In this case I can see it a little bit, but I'm not as bothered by it as you are and since this was introduced very early on in the processing stage it'll be a PITA to rectify so I'm just gonna leave it as is.
Topaz Denoise (used heavily in this image) also sharpens, even when you turn the sharpening setting right down and I when I applied it I was looking at the dim areas with low frequency detail and not enough at the bright and high frequency areas so I didn't notice its impact there. Anyway, I really don't think it's that bad and I'm happy enough with it as-is.
|
And all fair enough too Lee, I get it
Particularly in the case of regularly imaged targets, like this pair and when you consistently produce such good work, it is only ever going to be fairly minor things that can be suggested to further improve an already good image and such comments do risk appearing, to those that don't know the connection we have at least, perhaps somewhat picky
but as you know, I'm a big fan of your work and any comments I ever make (apart from those lauding the processing ground you walk on
) are very
genuine comments and not criticisms, made knowing full well you will understand the motivation behind them
I love this image game palava and don't pass disingenuous comments about anyone's images
If an image is of a less well known or rarely imaged object the processing quality is much less of a concern to me and the intriguing nature of the target tends to dominate any comments made
Already looking forward to your next posting
Mike