Composition isn't bad but the image quality is pretty poor - oversaturated, oversharpened and heavily shadow/highlighted, with significant artifacts particularly in the trees and around the sculler. The building isn't going anywhere, so there's not really any excuse for featuring a picture of this quality.
I have to admit that the digital version is not a really good quality. Last time I had to face the fact that automatically digitized slides could not compete with images done with digicams. Today I would not put the image on the FPC list any more
Andreas Tille, author
Go today and make a comparable photo (and no, I would not use this as an argument to keep a photo with technical constraints in FP).
Andreas Tille, author
Delist artificial sharpening reduces effective resolution and damages appearance, you cannot get information that is not there, this is not CSI.
HighInBC(Need help?
Ask me)23:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Composition isn't bad but the image quality is pretty poor - oversaturated, oversharpened and heavily shadow/highlighted, with significant artifacts particularly in the trees and around the sculler. The building isn't going anywhere, so there's not really any excuse for featuring a picture of this quality.
I have to admit that the digital version is not a really good quality. Last time I had to face the fact that automatically digitized slides could not compete with images done with digicams. Today I would not put the image on the FPC list any more
Andreas Tille, author
Go today and make a comparable photo (and no, I would not use this as an argument to keep a photo with technical constraints in FP).
Andreas Tille, author
Delist artificial sharpening reduces effective resolution and damages appearance, you cannot get information that is not there, this is not CSI.
HighInBC(Need help?
Ask me)23:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply