Marshall Lake

[PerPlunk]

By all means, blast away. Also, I appreciate the comments on the last one(tree at sunset), it looked really good until I got it on the light box, oh well...

[Elysian]

The image lacks depth. It would have been better with some more bushes in the forground.
I don't like the mountain in the middle, it's boring.
Congratualtions with the horizon though; it's not in the middle and straight.
The image is a bit blurry though.
The MAJOR thing that's wrong with this image is the colors; they're way off, just look at my screenshot of the histogram! You'll be amazed how much better this image looks after a good color correction!

Thanks for sharing.

[PerPlunk]

About this color correction, is this just a correction from the scan, or is it for the monitor? After doing a auto color correction in photoshop I can see an improvement, but compared to the slide, it overdoes it a bit I think... Also... What am I supposed to be seeing in the histogram? Thanks.

[Elysian]

It's quite obvious that you're not good with Photoshop, otherwise you would have understood what's wrong with the color when you saw the histogram and you wouldn't have tried to correct the colors with auto color correction, that's not the professional approach. Adobe only added these auto color corrections for beginners.

Sorry, but I'm not here to teach you Photoshop, that's what we have other sites for.
I just assumed that you were one of those who does know how to use Photoshop, sorry, my mistake.

[Sean Dempsey]

hahahahaha in the amount of space you took to explain how you WONT explain, you could have easily gave a simple explanation.

[PerPlunk]

Oh no JoeD, my mistake for thinking you might be able to refer me to something useful. In the future I'll make certain not to ask you to help me. Thanks for clearing that up.

I do appreciate the general tip of checking the levels, and after referring to this website:
http://www.quiknet.com/~frcn/Histograms.html
and following the procedure I came out with the image below, and do recognize much improvement, especially in the foreground, but the background mountains and sky seem off so I probably still need to work on that. If anyone has any more tips I'd be glad to hear them, either on the digital or photographic side. Thanks again.

[Elysian]

Hilarious, I'm the only one who commented, who made suggestions and now I'm the bad guy because I prefer not be a photoshop teacher... you guys are waaaay too funny!

[Mig]

I'm the bad guy because I prefer not be a photoshop teacher

It seems to me that you're the bad guy because your second post was rude and condescending. You reap what you sow.

[Sean Dempsey]

It seems to me that you're the bad guy because your second post was rude and condescending. You reap what you sow.

haha, owned.

[Sebastian]

It seems to me that you're the bad guy because your second post was rude and condescending. You reap what you sow.

Damn straight.

[PerPlunk]

Thanks for the help, I really appreciate it. After going back and checking over previous scans I can't believe how off the colors usually were compared to the slide... I hope to have some new material developed and scanned in a few weeks, hopefully not only will I have corrected some composition problems, but also some of the digital conversion problems.

[Mig]

Hey PerPlunk,

Yes, this is better although it could still be tweaked a little. The big problem with the original, shown in the histograms is that there was way too much blue. When you're in levels you can change that Channel dropdown from RBG composite to R, G & B individually. This will help you control each of the colors more accurately. I'm still learning myself so I can't tell you exactly how to set them, but try playing with each of them to see the effects.

Danielle

As you can see, this isn't really perfect either, but here's my take:

[Photo-John]

Oh no JoeD, my mistake for thinking you might be able to refer me to something useful. In the future I'll make certain not to ask you to help me. Thanks for clearing that up.

I do appreciate the general tip of checking the levels, and after referring to this website:
http://www.quiknet.com/~frcn/Histograms.html
and following the procedure I came out with the image below, and do recognize much improvement, especially in the foreground, but the background mountains and sky seem off so I probably still need to work on that. If anyone has any more tips I'd be glad to hear them, either on the digital or photographic side. Thanks again.

This still has a noticeable blue/cyan color cast on my caibrated monitor. I'm glad to see you've started to investigate the levels tool. I never use auto levels because it has no "intelligence". It just balances all the sliders. Sometimes it can make your images worse. A good levels adjustment has to be done by a person, while looking at the image.

Hopefully JoeD will figure out a nicer way to deal with the community here. He has some good advice to offer. But often he seems to have a hard time presenting it in a positive way. Take what you need and leave the rest.

[gahspidy]

Perplunk,
The second post you presented was a big improvement. I think Mig has done a good job there to enhance it even more, although it might be a bit over done.. .still looks fine.
The scene is great, but yes, some more of those reeds in the foreground would have given more of a sense of here and there depth. The mountain right in the middle does not feel right, usually try not to place things dead center unless it absolutely works. All in all it is a pleasing shot that has lots of potential, and is nice enough as it is.
I think JoeD means well here but may lack a more tactful way of presenting his thoughts. But he makes some good points to follow.
Keep em comin . . .

[Mig]

although it might be a bit over done

Heh. Yeah - they'll have to pry my Velvia from my cold dead hands.

PerPlunk - gahspidy's absolutely right - I have a tendency to pop colors too much. I love me some saturation. But it's definitely not for everyone - so just experiment and see what works best for you.

Danielle