Stained glass window

[Ian]

I'm not really religious, but I do like stained glass windows in churches. We were at the baptism of a friend's baby today at the Annunciation Church in Brighton (which we were informed is under threat of closure, sadly) and I snapped this with a little Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX3. I used minus-2EV exposure compensation to avoid burning out the colours. This is the whole frame with only some slight tweaking in levels and some sharpening after resizing for viewing on-screen. It's so easy and you can get beauitiful results.

Ian

[Stephen]

Re: Stained glass window

A nice result Ian, I'm impressed. I always thought the black version of that camera was rather cool looking too

[Danny Chau]

Re: Stained glass window

I'm not really religious, but I do like stained glass windows in churches. We were at the baptism of a friend's baby today at the Annunciation Church in Brighton (which we were informed is under threat of closure, sadly) and I snapped this with a little Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX3. I used minus-2EV exposure compensation to avoid burning out the colours. This is the whole frame with only some slight tweaking in levels and some sharpening after resizing for viewing on-screen. It's so easy and you can get beauitiful results.

Ian

Here, Ian, how's that?

[Ian]

Re: Stained glass window

The FX3 is interesting - it's looks like the earlier FX models and is the same size, but the FX3 is a budget model with a plastic body rather than a metal one. It feels a lot lighter, without that metal solidity, but apart from that it's fine. There is noise in shadow detail even at ISO 100, which is a bit disappointing, but colours are good and image sharpness is impressive, helped by MegaOIS stabilisation.

Ian

[Ian]

Re: Stained glass window

Here, Ian, how's that?

Well.... actually, Danny, although technically good, no doubt, I don't think brightening the picture and straighenting the perspective has improved it, sorry. It now kind of looks like it came from a Las Vegas wedding chapel Of course, as I was at the scene, I can recall what the window looked like in reality, so I suppose I have an unfair advantage.

What does everyone else think?

Ian

[lumix]

Re: Stained glass window

Well.... actually, Danny, although technically good, no doubt, I don't think brightening the picture and straighenting the perspective has improved it, sorry. It now kind of looks like it came from a Las Vegas wedding chapel Of course, as I was at the scene, I can recall what the window looked like in reality, so I suppose I have an unfair advantage.

What does everyone else think?

Ian

First thing we should all ask ourselves when looking at an image is dose it need to be altered. In this case I'm with you Ian. Danny's edit has to me lost the original impact of size. When we look up at a tall building it slops away so why change what the eye sees just because we have the technology to do so. By all means correct exposure/sharpness/colour balance if that's necessary but perspective in a lot of cases should be left alone.

[coupekid]

Re: Stained glass window

Well.... actually, Danny, although technically good, no doubt, I don't think brightening the picture and straighenting the perspective has improved it, sorry. It now kind of looks like it came from a Las Vegas wedding chapel Of course, as I was at the scene, I can recall what the window looked like in reality, so I suppose I have an unfair advantage.

What does everyone else think?

Ian

well, I kind of like the brightening that Danny has done, however, I dont like the perspective change as it looks too flat. I like the imposing effect the original has, the feeling of scale makes it more natural and grand.

[Stephen]

Re: Stained glass window

First thing we should all ask ourselves when looking at an image is dose it need to be altered. In this case I'm with you Ian. Danny's edit has to me lost the original impact of size. When we look up at a tall building it slops away so why change what the eye sees just because we have the technology to do so. By all means correct exposure/sharpness/colour balance if that's necessary but perspective in a lot of cases should be left alone.

Got to agree Ron. The perspective change was the first thing I noticed and thought should have been left

[Patrick]

Re: Stained glass window

Well.... actually, Danny, although technically good, no doubt, I don't think brightening the picture and straighenting the perspective has improved it, sorry. It now kind of looks like it came from a Las Vegas wedding chapel Of course, as I was at the scene, I can recall what the window looked like in reality, so I suppose I have an unfair advantage.

What does everyone else think?

Ian

[Pops]

Re: Stained glass window

I have to go with the original.
It gave just the right angle to be there, looking up.

[Pol]

Re: Stained glass window

I prefer Ian's original. It's a nice shot, good detail, good colours and the perspective is 'true' for the angle of the shot.

Pol

[Stephen]

Re: Stained glass window

Patrick I think you will find that when you compare Dannys attached image with Ians original, there is a great difference. Suspect you have used the copy in the original quote of Dannys, which of course is the same

[spl]

Re: Stained glass window

I actually do like the perspective change and if there was any brightening in Danny's take I could hardly notice it. This ability to straighten verticals on photosoftware has only recently been discovered by me and I think its great! I think in real life when you are standing in front of a building or a window your brain compensates much more for diminishing parallels than it does when you are looking at a photograph (I know for me it does) so a little bit of correction in pictures seems to me to be a good thing.