Ooops

Well I do my best and still need to try harder old school reports don't fade away.

Barry, what did you shoot this image on and what ever have you done to it

It's a nice chocolate-box image, and it looks like your exposure was spot-on - but why is the image quality so poor?

Tell me what your workflow is and what software you are using for image processing?

Andy

A canon 350 with sigma 50mm-500mm on tripod 116mm f/8.0 1/250 sec.

RAW lightroom 1.1 adjusted converted to jpeg in Corel paint shop X and resized to post. 1st effort looked fine on my laptop.but the set size did not post as set. Hence the second post and now it looks totally different to the original on my screen.

I also have CS2 and try each in the processing with seperate files.

Barry

Barry..Barry....Paintshop....no no no no no .......

Convert the RAW to TIFF, either 16 or 8 bit at 300dpi full size and open in CS2, do your post work, resize to 720 on the longest side, change the colour profile to sRGB and then save as a jpeg at 200Kb or a bit less - that way you'll stand a chance of getting the best from your RAW image.

You shouldn't be working any other way really - any questions or probs just ask matey as we are all here to help

But Paintsh...... oh God I can't even bring myself to type the word BIN IT

Much better size wise but as Andy says the quality is very poor. I assume you've just saved as a low quality jpeg - Andy's post should sort it. As for suggestions I wonder if you moved further back and used a longer lens you may have been able to fill the water part of the image with colourful reflections. Just a thought, I like how you have framed the image with the leaves at all sides. Tristan

Hi Barry,

Nice image spoilt by the processing, good advice from Andy. If you like I can send you as an attachment a workflow guide that Phil Shaw posted a while ago, I still work to it.

Regards

Rob

All that is wrong with the processing is an unsharpened JPG, I cant see any other problems with the colours which look balanced enough to me.

What the others haven't highlighted / ask is that -
1. On further inspection I think the focal point is somewhere else completely, there is no way this will sharpen up.
2. You have focused on the trees and not the view, making the leaves the focus and leaving 3/4 of the shot OOF. It would have worked much better the other way round.
3. With a lens like the 50-500 you will get moderate DOF at 50mm to very little at 500mm even at f16, was this a shot from a distance away at a longer focal length? If so, 50mm would have been the better option.

Without a doubt my processing was a major fault. I have retraced my steps using Andy's advice and workflow may I repost for further critique please?

I'd appreciate sight of your workflow attachment Rob.

Thanks again

Barry