Misty Mooning

[Stagecoach]

Just for fun as Izzie had asked if I had taken any shots of my four legged friends I met up with the other day, I had not but promised I would on my next meeting with them

This is the final shot from this mornings very very early outing up the mountains in the clouds and mist and he was just begging to have his portrait done.

So, for Izzie
1/80s, f/5.6, ISO400, 90mm



Grahame

[Kodiak]

•
Hey Grahame, I just imagined the take could have more definition without
loosing any of its misty mooooooning moooood! I think it works! Wanna see?

[Stagecoach]

•
Hey Grahame, I just imagined the take could have more definition without
loosing any of its misty mooooooning moooood! I think it works! Wanna see?

Yes please Kodiak. I spent a bit of time with this one trying to retain that 'mist' but just giving a boost in definition of the head, but it's certainly not as good as the actual scene I saw.

[Kodiak]

Yes please Kodiak.

Here you go… I hope you like it!

[Shadowman]

Nice effort, I would work the cow until it was nicely detailed.

[Stagecoach]

Nice effort, I would work the cow until it was nicely detailed.

But John it was a very misty area and detail was obscured by the mist and my intention was to record a misty scene.

[Kodiak]

Nice effort, I would work the cow until it was nicely detailed.

I have to be careful here, John. Since I did not witness what Grahame did…
I just wanted to give him a hint. Nobody can do it right… only speculate. He
should know how it was.

[Stagecoach]

Here you go… I hope you like it!

I spent some time going between the two in the lytebox Kodiak trying to make up my mind. My choice, I think, would be somewhere in the middle of the two.

It's one of those images I really should have done two or three versions of as my main interest was to see how the mist works, and then compared and made a choice.

Speed was my priority as I have a load of multi bracketed exposures of mountain scenes to sort through that were taken before this one that may cause me to have to learn merging exposures.

Grahame

[FootLoose]

Grahame, I started working my way through a book on LAB a couple of days ago, and since you mentioned you wanted a bit more detail in the head I thought this might be a good candidate to try sharpening the L channel. What do you think? Did it lose too much of the mist? (I'll pull the image if you want)

[Stagecoach]

Grahame, I started working my way through a book on LAB a couple of days ago, and since you mentioned you wanted a bit more detail in the head I thought this might be a good candidate to try sharpening the L channel. What do you think? Did it lose too much of the mist? (I'll pull the image if you want)

Greg, the boost in definition of the head I mention in post 3 was worded badly, what I should of said was that all I did was to add some extra (from the global sharpening) local sharpening just in the area of the nostril slits and the eyes which I considered emphasised the stare I was getting.

Whilst you mod has sharpened up the head I think it's a wee bit too much compared to the body to retain the mood of the scene.

Certainly do not pull it, I have no problem with changes to images, it helps us all.

[IzzieK]

Thank you for the cow, my friend...it is certainly nice to see all the changes...and end up googling some terminologies that is way over my head...mists are quite hard to work on in PP as I had found out recently...

(Oh btw, it was a full day the other night but earlier in the day I was talking to my neighbour and I happened to mentioned that "....we are mooning tonight..." She gave me a dirty look. ) Hey! I have an excuse -- English is not my first language...

[Stagecoach]

You are welcome Izzie

The mist (low cloud I assume) in the area I took this was quite amazing and there were some great bushes covered in webs but the light was just too bright for things by then. I did get a spider in the centre of a web but too poor to post so it's on my list to get back to the area in the week and do some more misty work.

Grahame