On 2008 Jun 1, at 2:48 PM, Klaus Karcher wrote:
Ben Goren wrote:On 2008 Jun 1, at 11:24 AM, Hal V. Engel wrote:Whatever the physics behind it -- and your description certainly makes sense -- it's a /huge/ part of the problem here. Indeed, some of the pieces use exactly the kind of maple you used as an example.On Saturday 31 May 2008 15:53:29 Ben Goren wrote:> To make matters worse, some of the woods are very slightly iridescent,> and change luminance (mostly) and hue (slightly) rather noticeably > with shifting lighting angles....I don't think this is iridescence but rather it is the characteristics of the wood grain which is a 3D structrure [. . . .]sure. ... another source of error could be interferences between the Bayer pattern of the camera and the wood grain causing color casts and moire effects.
I don't think so, not in this case. I haven't noticed anything like that, even in 100% crops. Of course, I suppose Camera Raw could be automatically compensating for that, causing some other sort of artifact...but these shots look very clean, to be honest.
I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm just gonna have to hunker down and hand-adjust each image to get the best compromise I can live with.Well, that's what makes up art IMHO: its peculiarity often can't be simply reproduced.
Especially in this case, as I'm learning....
Good luck -- and try to enjoy it.
I actually am, surprisingly enough. It helps that I'm the one pushing myself; I think my Dad would have settled for a lot less. But that's / his/ problem, not mine....