Empathy List Archives

LC

Larry Colen

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 8:28 AM

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ This one is my current "best try": https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? Thanks, Larry -- Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

MW

mike wilson

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 12:14 PM

Are you sure you got those the right way round? For me, the previous attempt is head and shoulders better than the present version.

On 16/02/2024 08:28 GMT Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Are you sure you got those the right way round? For me, the previous attempt is head and shoulders better than the present version. > On 16/02/2024 08:28 GMT Larry Colen <lrc@red4est.com> wrote: > > > I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. > > I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ > > This one is my current "best try": > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ > I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. > > All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 > > I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

PS

Paul Sorenson

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 5:09 PM

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than
NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better
see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. -p 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. > > I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ > > This one is my current "best try": > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ > I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. > > All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 > > I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? > > Thanks, > Larry > -- > Larry Colen > lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood > > > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >

LC

Larry Colen

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 6:00 PM

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general.

The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way.

Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print.

Larry

On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general. The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way. Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print. Larry > On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: > > I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. > > -p > > > 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano > > On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >> I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. >> >> I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ >> >> This one is my current "best try": >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ >> I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. >> >> All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 >> >> I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? >> >> Thanks, >> Larry >> -- >> Larry Colen >> lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood >> >> >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >> > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

AC

Alan C

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 6:15 PM

I couldn't see flying saucers on any of them!

Alan C

On 16-Feb-24 08:00 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general.

The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way.

Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print.

  Larry

On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

I couldn't see flying saucers on any of them! Alan C On 16-Feb-24 08:00 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general. > > The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way. > > Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print. > > Larry > > >> On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: >> >> I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. >> >> -p >> >> >> 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano >> >> On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >>> I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. >>> >>> I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: >>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>> >>> This one is my current "best try": >>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>> I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. >>> >>> All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: >>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 >>> >>> I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Larry >>> -- >>> Larry Colen >>> lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood >>> >>> >>> -- >>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>> >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >> > -- > Larry Colen > lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est > > > > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

LC

Larry Colen

Fri, Feb 16, 2024 6:37 PM

On Feb 16, 2024, at 10:15 AM, Alan C cole@lantic.net wrote:

I couldn't see flying saucers on any of them!

No flying saucers that I know of, just Andromeda and Mars.

Alan C

On 16-Feb-24 08:00 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general.

The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way.

Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print.

 Larry

On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

> On Feb 16, 2024, at 10:15 AM, Alan C <cole@lantic.net> wrote: > > I couldn't see flying saucers on any of them! No flying saucers that I know of, just Andromeda and Mars. > > Alan C > > On 16-Feb-24 08:00 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general. >> >> The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way. >> >> Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print. >> >> Larry >> >> >>> On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: >>> >>> I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. >>> >>> -p >>> >>> >>> 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano >>> >>> On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >>>> I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. >>>> >>>> I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>>> >>>> This one is my current "best try": >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>>> I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. >>>> >>>> All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 >>>> >>>> I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Larry >>>> -- >>>> Larry Colen >>>> lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>>> >>> -- >>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>> >> -- >> Larry Colen >> lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est >> >> >> >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

MW

mike wilson

Sat, Feb 17, 2024 7:46 AM

I don't disagree with the overspiced evaluation but the other doesn't even have salt and pepper. Definitely more on the foreground but not so much as the before image, which does seem to have an artefact at the junction of land and sky. The sky is possibly better in the new version (in that it is more realistic - I don't know, as I was not there) but that is arguably a matter of taste.

On 16/02/2024 18:00 GMT Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com w rote:

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general.

The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way.

Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print.

 Larry

On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

I don't disagree with the overspiced evaluation but the other doesn't even have salt and pepper. Definitely more on the foreground but not so much as the before image, which does seem to have an artefact at the junction of land and sky. The sky is possibly better in the new version (in that it is more realistic - I don't know, as I was not there) but that is arguably a matter of taste. > On 16/02/2024 18:00 GMT Larry Colen <lrc@red4est.com> w rote: > > > Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general. > > The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way. > > Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print. > > Larry > > > > On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: > > > > I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. > > > > -p > > > > > > 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano > > > > On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: > >> I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. > >> > >> I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: > >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ > >> > >> This one is my current "best try": > >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ > >> I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. > >> > >> All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: > >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 > >> > >> I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Larry > >> -- > >> Larry Colen > >> lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood > >> > >> > >> -- > >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net > >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > >> > > -- > > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > > > > -- > Larry Colen > lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est > > > > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

LC

Larry Colen

Sat, Feb 17, 2024 9:19 PM

Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58

Previous attempts are here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277

Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions?

On Feb 16, 2024, at 11:46 PM, mike wilson m.9.wilson@ntlworld.com wrote:

I don't disagree with the overspiced evaluation but the other doesn't even have salt and pepper. Definitely more on the foreground but not so much as the before image, which does seem to have an artefact at the junction of land and sky. The sky is possibly better in the new version (in that it is more realistic - I don't know, as I was not there) but that is arguably a matter of taste.

On 16/02/2024 18:00 GMT Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com w rote:

Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general.

The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way.

Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print.

Larry

On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image.

-p

89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano

On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:

I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch.

I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/

This one is my current "best try":
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/
I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process.

All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702

I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better?

Thanks,
Larry

Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58 Previous attempts are here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277 Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions? > On Feb 16, 2024, at 11:46 PM, mike wilson <m.9.wilson@ntlworld.com> wrote: > > I don't disagree with the overspiced evaluation but the other doesn't even have salt and pepper. Definitely more on the foreground but not so much as the before image, which does seem to have an artefact at the junction of land and sky. The sky is possibly better in the new version (in that it is more realistic - I don't know, as I was not there) but that is arguably a matter of taste. >> On 16/02/2024 18:00 GMT Larry Colen <lrc@red4est.com> w rote: >> >> >> Interesting. Thank you people. I had felt that in general the first version was a bit "over spiced". I'm trying to find the right balance between making the image pop, and overdoing it. If you look at other photos in the collection, there is a lot of light pollution close to the horizon, and when saturation and vibrance are dialed up a lot of swatches of green and magenta noise in the sky in general. >> >> The new version of lightroom does make it easier for me to duplicate and modify masks, so when I get a chance, I can try a version with more saturation, contrast and clarity in the milky way. >> >> Is there consensus that I should also bring up the exposure on the foreground? I did create a mask for the snow on mount Shasta, which I had dialed down a bit from the previous print. >> >> Larry >> >> >>> On Feb 16, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: >>> >>> I'd have to agree with Mike - the 889-pano is more pleasing to me than NR-HDR-Pano. The milky way is better rendered and being able to better see the horizon and landscape add to be overall image. >>> >>> -p >>> >>> >>> 89888-Enhanced-NR-HDR-Pano >>> >>> On 2/16/2024 2:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >>>> I decided to have a go at another one of my photos, trying to take advantage of new features in lightroom. It is an HDR panorama (at 15 and 20 seconds). For the new version I did a lightroom noise reduction of each of the frames before doing an HDR pano stitch. >>>> >>>> I believe this is my previous version that I used for printing: >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/30524911188/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>>> >>>> This one is my current "best try": >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/53532544424/in/album-72177720314781277/ >>>> I've learned a fair bit about using masks in the process. >>>> >>>> All of my processing attempts over the years are in this album: >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277/with/42907311702 >>>> >>>> I would appreciate people's thoughts about what improvements the processing might need. Is there anything about any of the older attempts that worked better? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Larry >>>> -- >>>> Larry Colen >>>> lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> To unsubscribe send an email topdml-leave@pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>>> >>> -- >>> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>> >> >> -- >> Larry Colen >> lrc@red4est.com sent from ret13est >> >> >> >> -- >> %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

PS

Paul Sorenson

Sun, Feb 18, 2024 1:08 AM

Either the middle or bottom image works for me, although of the two I'd
prefer the bottom. Either of the two has a more defined horizon and I
prefer the more defined trees (?) in the lower right of the bottom image
as compared to the less defined in the middle image. -p

On 2/17/2024 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58

Previous attempts are here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277

Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions?

Either the middle or bottom image works for me, although of the two I'd prefer the bottom. Either of the two has a more defined horizon and I prefer the more defined trees (?) in the lower right of the bottom image as compared to the less defined in the middle image. -p On 2/17/2024 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos > > https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58 > > Previous attempts are here: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277 > > Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions? > > > >

LC

Larry Colen

Sun, Feb 18, 2024 2:25 AM

On Feb 17, 2024, at 5:08 PM, Paul Sorenson pentax1941@studio1941.com wrote:

Either the middle or bottom image works for me, although of the two I'd prefer the bottom. Either of the two has a more defined horizon and I prefer the more defined trees (?) in the lower right of the bottom image as compared to the less defined in the middle image. -p

Thanks, the bottom one was my final go at it. I thought the first one was it, then saw some things to fix, and after a while saw a few more things and did the third.It's getting to the point that my computer is really starting to bog down, so I ought to call it done, at least until I get a faster machine :-)

On 2/17/2024 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58

Previous attempts are here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277

Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions?

--
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.

--
Larry Colen
lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

> On Feb 17, 2024, at 5:08 PM, Paul Sorenson <pentax1941@studio1941.com> wrote: > > Either the middle or bottom image works for me, although of the two I'd prefer the bottom. Either of the two has a more defined horizon and I prefer the more defined trees (?) in the lower right of the bottom image as compared to the less defined in the middle image. -p Thanks, the bottom one was my final go at it. I thought the first one was it, then saw some things to fix, and after a while saw a few more things and did the third.It's getting to the point that my computer is really starting to bog down, so I ought to call it done, at least until I get a faster machine :-) > > On 2/17/2024 3:19 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> Flickr is being a PITA, so I posted my last rework to google photos >> >> https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Xmnhva9QoBupGf58 >> >> Previous attempts are here: >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72177720314781277 >> >> Thoughts? Feelings? Suggestions? >> >> >> >> > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. > -- Larry Colen lrc@red4est.com. sent from Mirkwood

pdml@pdml.net

Another lightroom redo

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry

Thanks,
Larry