The RAW Deal: wademoore (A Photography Dynasty)

[wade moore]

This dynasty was inspired by Dodgerchick's Photography Dynasty - The RAW Deal: A Day In The Life Of A DSLR (A Photography Dynasty) (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=50843).

I'm trying to finally get back into photography. I have a borrowed Canon EOS D60 that I'm using for now and I'm going to do as much as I can before I have to give it back - then I may consider investing in one of my own.

You will see me try not to do too much "digital darkroom" techniques as that's just not where my interest lies - I try to get the picture as much like I want it in the initial shot and then just try to clean it up in the RAW format with basic changes.

For now I'm merely using the program Picasa that Google puts out which has very basic options.

All comments/criticism/suggestions are welcome. My hope in doing this is that A) it will force me to actual get out and take pictures and B) that it will improve my abilities - so the comments and feedback will help me to do both of these.

[wade moore]

I have a friend that plays in an adult baseball league - so I took the chance on Sunday to do my favorite thing in photography - sports. Unfortunately it was a really hot, muggy day so the natural shots were lacking in a certain crispness that I like to see. Fortunately I learned very quickly that with this RAW format (this was my first time really using it with my previous experience in an actual dark room) you can really very easily make up for such things if you start out with a good image. So following are several of the shots that I really liked.

[wade moore]

INITIAL IMAGE
http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6071 (Medium).jpg

MODIFICATIONS APPLIED:

While learning this process, Picasa has an option called "I'm Feeling Lucky". What this option basically does is tries to auto adjust everything. So on this one I did "I'm Feeling Lucky" and the "Sharpen" Effect.

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6071-SET (Medium).jpg

FINAL IMAGE:
http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6071-1 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

INITIAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6111 (Medium).jpg

MODIFICATIONS APPLIED:

You're going to see that all of the rest are very similar. Basically I think I had to adjust them all for the poor atmospheric conditions (muggy/hazy). I bumped up the highlights a bit, shadows a bit more, and the color temperature pretty significantly. In addition, I used the "Sharpen" effect on all of the images - it really works well.

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6111-SET (Medium).jpg

FINAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6111-1 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

INITIAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6087 (Medium).jpg

MODIFICATIONS APPLIED:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6087-SET (Medium).jpg

FINAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6087-1 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

INITIAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6114 (Medium).jpg

MODIFICATIONS APPLIED:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6114-SET (Medium).jpg

FINAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6114-1 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

One of the big challenges that you'll see if you really pay attention in those shots is I had to shoot through a fence. I was thinking that away from the 1st base line the fence was like 4 ft tall, but I was wrong - it was more like 6 instead of 8 or 9 elsewhere. So, I had to adjust and in some cases that just meant hoping it was out of focus enough that it wouldn't get in the way of the picture.

The picture of the catcher initially was my favorite. I really like the composition, I think the pose is interesting for a picture, etc. But the more I look at it the more I realize that in my efforts to isolate and only have him purely focused that I think I focused on his knees and his head, mit, etc. seem to be slightly out of focus while his knees are sharply in focus.

Outside of that I'm very happy to get the slide in-action. In taking sports shots there is so much to being ready in the right place at the right time and I failed at that a LOT on Sunday, but that shot was one of my success imo.

[Eaglesfan27]

Not to interrupt, but all I can see from my work computer is red X's for all of the pictures. I'll give it a try from home later today. If I can resolve this issue, I'll be following along.

[wade moore]

Not to interrupt, but all I can see from my work computer is red X's for all of the pictures. I'll give it a try from home later today. If I can resolve this issue, I'll be following along.

I have the same problem, but I know that google is blocked here (they're hosted at picasa)...

However, my brother had the same problem and he can go straight to my picasa profile and see the pictures, so it's not blocked for him.

It showed on my home computer, but that could be a cache thing. Let me know if you have any luck, but I'll take a look when I get home. Worst case i'll move them over to Flickr, or Photobucket, or whatever. I just don't have access to the images right now.

[lordscarlet]

I have the same problem, but I know that google is blocked here (they're hosted at picasa)...

However, my brother had the same problem and he can go straight to my picasa profile and see the pictures, so it's not blocked for him.

It showed on my home computer, but that could be a cache thing. Let me know if you have any luck, but I'll take a look when I get home. Worst case i'll move them over to Flickr, or Photobucket, or whatever. I just don't have access to the images right now.

I have a feeling the direct links are somehow blocked but not the picasa pages. Although, it's the same url pretty much.. hmm...

Ahhh.. I just copied the url from here into my browser and it worked. I bet picasa blocks outside linking directly to the image.

[wade moore]

I have a feeling the direct links are somehow blocked but not the picasa pages. Although, it's the same url pretty much.. hmm...

Ahhh.. I just copied the url from here into my browser and it worked. I bet picasa blocks outside linking directly to the image.

Yeah, that's what I tested at home. Might have to just use a different picture host.

[Eaglesfan27]

Yeah, it doesn't work at home either. Oddly, I don't see a red X at home. It's just blank space.

[wade moore]

Ok - should be fixed now.

I know one comment that LS made was that he thought I darkened up the shadows too much. I see his point on the sliding picture, I'm not sure whether I agree on the rest though.

[lordscarlet]

Actually, I was looking at the catcher and my statement was meant to be (I did not say darken, and I did not say what I'm about to say) that the shadows are too washed out.

[Lorena]

Looks like I have some competition! Time to get my trusty camera out :p ;)

I'm leaving for work but I'll write some more later... awesome pics there wade.

[Lorena]

My favorite picture is the one where the pitcher releases the ball. There's a little bit of luck involved in getting "the perfect shot", especially in sports photography where the action is non-stop. I like how his arm is blurred but everything else is in focus. I can appreciate the timing as the ball is leaving his fingertips, that's a tough shot to capture. I remember going to a Chargers game several years ago and took a picture of Darren Bennett (punter) moments after he punted the ball. Good leg extension and he was about half a foot off the ground... perfect shot.

So a little over a year later and we're finally priviledged to your dynasty eh? :rolleyes:

Cool deal, looking forward to more pictures! Oh, does your camera have a "continuous shooting" option?

[Eaglesfan27]

I'm not nearly the photographer either of you are, but I really enjoy looking at great pictures. I agree with Dodgerchick that the 2nd one is my favorite. I really like your post shot modifications. Nice work. I'm looking forward to looking at more in the future.

[wade moore]

My favorite picture is the one where the pitcher releases the ball. There's a little bit of luck involved in getting "the perfect shot", especially in sports photography where the action is non-stop. I like how his arm is blurred but everything else is in focus. I can appreciate the timing as the ball is leaving his fingertips, that's a tough shot to capture. I remember going to a Chargers game several years ago and took a picture of Darren Bennett (punter) moments after he punted the ball. Good leg extension and he was about half a foot off the ground... perfect shot.

So a little over a year later and we're finally priviledged to your dynasty eh? :rolleyes:

Cool deal, looking forward to more pictures! Oh, does your camera have a "continuous shooting" option?

I'm not 100% sure whether it has a continuous shooting option, I'll have to check.

That being said, there is some luck to taking sports action shots - but there is some skill to it to if you want to have a fairly high success rate of getting the option timed right (which I think I have).

I suppose I should have explained more about my camera settings/methods since I did state the digital dark room stuff was more important.

All of these shots you are seeing were taken on a Canon EOS D60, on Manual Focus, I'm not sure what film speed (I'll have to check), with an F-Stop of 4.5 or 5.2 depending on the shot - set to aperture priority (so I didn't record the shutter speed).

I'll give a brief explanation of how I go about getting action shots, sorry if I'm saying something obvious - but I definitely don't think it's obvious to those that haven't had at least some training in it and are trying to figure this out on their own.

HOW I SET-UP FOR ACTION SHOTS

So, there is one key point in how I used the camera - Manual Focus. In sports - particularly a sport like baseball or basketball - you want to setup to be ready to anticipate where the action you want to take place is going to happen.

Let's take the pitcher for an example since you mentioned him.

I set the F-Stop to 4.5 because a personal thing of mine with shots is I like to have one key object and focus and the rest out of focus. This gives me a small Depth Of Field (if you're reading this and any terms are completely foreign to you, ask me to explain and I will) - so in this case the picture is the only thing fully in focus.

Then, I setup and focus on the pitcher manually. I hold the camera sitting on him, manually focused, and ready to go. I think wait until the split second or so before the point I want the shot and snap the picture. This makes a DRAMATIC difference from auto-focus as with auto-focus you have the time it takes for the camera to focus to worry about. If you're using Auto-Focus for sports, I would recommend strongly learning to use manual focus.

That being said, there is a certain amount of luck involved to. The slide for instance, he was on second and I had to wait through a lot of pitches ready at the plate hoping that someone would hit a single giving him a chance to score, but just enough of a chance that he had to slide. If I wasn't setup already focused at the plate - no way I get that shot. So there's some luck/educated guessing/waiting that goes on.

[wade moore]

Actually, I was looking at the catcher and my statement was meant to be (I did not say darken, and I did not say what I'm about to say) that the shadows are too washed out.

Interesting... You think the shadow is MORE washed out than the original? Unless you're saying that in the original and the modified it's too washed out I'm not seeing it - is there a particular part of the photo that it stands out more?

[wade moore]

Looks like I have some competition! Time to get my trusty camera out :p ;)

I'm leaving for work but I'll write some more later... awesome pics there wade.

Competition is good! I think one of the fun things at least from what I've seen from yours compared to mine is that we have at least relatively different interests in subject so it is fun to see what someone with different interests comes up with.

I'm not nearly the photographer either of you are, but I really enjoy looking at great pictures. I agree with Dodgerchick that the 2nd one is my favorite. I really like your post shot modifications. Nice work. I'm looking forward to looking at more in the future.

Thanks! Nice to know that there are a few people watching along. To be honest, I feel like I've really gotten rusty. I took 3 semesters of photography courses in college where I worked in a dark room and did it all the old fashioned way. I'm used to black and white photography and some of the freedom you get in the dark room - so some of this is kind of knew for me. It's something I loved doing and I'm having a hard time "making" the time for - so knowing folks are following here definitely encourages me.

As for the favorite shot of the two of yours - I do like that one. It was the best pitching shot I took that day imo, although I would have loved to have gotten it even close to the pique of his release - but I'll get there ;).

[Antmeister]

FINAL IMAGE:

http://fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6087-1%20%28Medium%29.jpg
[/B][/U]

This is my favorite shot. Although it is a little dark, the framing is great and I like how the batter and catcher stand out. I don't know if this was intentional or not, but it is a nice shot.

[wade moore]

I remember going to a Chargers game several years ago...

Speaking of.. Dug these up for you.. I'm pretty sure this was just with my point-and-click Canon A60... From the October 2004 San Diego vs. Jacksonville game... I had a press pass...

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 016 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 006 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 013 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 018 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 023 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

I also went through the rest of my baseball pictures and quickly did up the rest of them... I didn't take a lot of time in getting the perfect, just cleaned them up some.. if anyone wants me to talk about any of them or comment on any, feel free - http://www.flickr.com/photos/12478272@N00/sets/72157601308223829/

[wade moore]

I was looking through my pictures and realized that while borrowing this camera on a trip to California last summer (San Francisco and Lake Tahoe) I had taken a bunch of pictures in RAW format and intended to start this thread a long time ago using those pictures. So, I'm working with a few and will post as I get them.

[wade moore]

DATE/LOCATION: August 10, 2006 - Lake Tahoe

SUBJECT:

I was trying to catch the sunset over Lake Tahoe. Judging by the pictures I tried a LOT to get this without sunspots. This is the one picture I got that didn't have sunspots. I'm still not 100% happy with it, but I like it.

CAMERA SETTINGS:

Focal Length: 28.0mm
Exposure Time: 1/3000
Aperture: f/3.5
ISO: 1000

DIGITAL ENHANCEMENTS:

Only minor changes. I upped the highlights slightly, upped the Shadows just a little, and warmed it up some.

BEFORE:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_4845 (Medium).jpg

AFTER:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_4845-1 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

I'll be honest - now that I'm looking at them side by side, I might like the original better and maybe I should just leave it as-is on this one.

[Lorena]

Speaking of.. Dug these up for you.. I'm pretty sure this was just with my point-and-click Canon A60... From the October 2004 San Diego vs. Jacksonville game... I had a press pass...

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 016 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 006 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 013 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 018 (Medium).jpg

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/San Diego Charges v Jacksonville Jaguars - 20041010 023 (Medium).jpg

I got chills looking at the one in the endzone... wow, that one's awesome! Thanks wade, MUCH appreciated!! :)

[Lorena]

powdered blue... gotta love it! I'll write some more later.

[Antmeister]

Awwwwww.....memories. Those shots of the Chargers are awesome. Good job!

[wade moore]

I got chills looking at the one in the endzone... wow, that one's awesome! Thanks wade, MUCH appreciated!! :)

I'll tell you one thing that was just amazing/awesome to me. Even in 2004 when LT wasn't as big of a superstar as he is now - it was VERY obvious how much the city of San Diego and the Chargers fans loved him. I would never leave that place if I was him.

[Lorena]

To be honest, I feel like I've really gotten rusty. I took 3 semesters of photography courses in college where I worked in a dark room and did it all the old fashioned way. I'm used to black and white photography and some of the freedom you get in the dark room - so some of this is kind of knew for me. It's something I loved doing and I'm having a hard time "making" the time for - so knowing folks are following here definitely encourages me.

Yeah I'm getting really rusty myself. I also took about 3 semesters of photography like you. One was slide photography, and the other 2 were basic black and white photography in the dark room, I think... it's been a long, long time can't really remember.

What you mentioned about manual focus is so true. When I took those beginning classes, everything was manual including calculating the correct settings and I noticed that those pictures were much better than the one's I take now where many of them are blurry. I tend to focus on the wrong thing and end up with a crappy picture. I need to get back to basics, I think.

[Lorena]

Ahem: http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?p=1522963#post1522963

It's not the best post processing work, but it's something. So... where's yours? :)

[wade moore]

Umm.. weird, I swear I posted something earlier today... i'm pretty confused actually...

[wade moore]

DATE/LOCATION: August 11, 2007 - Field by my house

SUBJECT:

When coming home yesterday I noticed a field next to my house had tons of butterflies. So I decided to go out and take try and get a good shot. I got a few pretty good butterfly shots, but actually like this one of a bee even better...

CAMERA SETTINGS:

Focal Length: 200.00mm
Exposure Time: 1/350
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 100

DIGITAL ENHANCEMENTS:

None. I really liked it as is.

IMAGE:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6163 (Medium).jpg

[wade moore]

Hrmm.. the conversion to .jpg seems to have taken some of the sharpness from it, but I still like it.

[Lorena]

Have you considered investing in Adobe Photoshop Elements? I believe it's about $70.00 or so, but I think it's a worthy investment.

BTW, that's an awesome picture wade, I can't believe there was no post processing involved! I noticed you're using Picasa for post processing; is there a "save to web" option? A lot of detail gets lost when saving it as a .jpg option and then importing it to the web. The colors are so vibrant... I love it!

I like your format and hope you don't mind if I use it as well.

[wade moore]

Have you considered investing in Adobe Photoshop Elements? I believe it's about $70.00 or so, but I think it's a worthy investment.

BTW, that's an awesome picture wade, I can't believe there was no post processing involved! I noticed you're using Picasa for post processing; is there a "save to web" option? A lot of detail gets lost when saving it as a .jpg option and then importing it to the web. The colors are so vibrant... I love it!

I like your format and hope you don't mind if I use it as well.
Yeah, I've thought about dropping the change for Elements or CS2, just haven't gotten down to doing it..

Thanks for the compliment, like I said, I'd really prefer to not get into too much post-processing anyways - part of why I've put off getting something more expensive..

It does not have a save to web option, but I'll have to play with the export/save as/etc options some and see if there is something that turns out better.

As for the format - more power to you, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery - right? ;)

[Lorena]

Ahem

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?p=1526779#post1526779

[wade moore]

;)..

I'm off all next week, so I anticipate a lot more action from me in this thread during the week..

In fact I wonder if we get a start on your idea and just time it so that I have pictures ahead of time while I don't have the camera...

[DanGarion]

Then, I setup and focus on the pitcher manually. I hold the camera sitting on him, manually focused, and ready to go. I think wait until the split second or so before the point I want the shot and snap the picture. This makes a DRAMATIC difference from auto-focus as with auto-focus you have the time it takes for the camera to focus to worry about. If you're using Auto-Focus for sports, I would recommend strongly learning to use manual focus.

This depends on the camera. With my camera I can do prefocus by slightly depressing my shoot button and the camera will focus on the subject for me. Then once the action starts (as I'm still pressing the shooting button halfway) I fully depress the shoot button to take the picture.

[wade moore]

This depends on the camera. With my camera I can do prefocus by slightly depressing my shoot button and the camera will focus on the subject for me. Then once the action starts (as I'm still pressing the shooting button halfway) I fully depress the shoot button to take the picture.

Good point. That will work on a lot of cameras - in fact probably on the one I'm using. I'm personally probably just more comfortable with manually focusing since the camera I worked on when I was doing the dark room, etc, etc. was an old Minolta that didn't even have automatic focus.

[Lorena]

Good point. That will work on a lot of cameras - in fact probably on the one I'm using. I'm personally probably just more comfortable with manually focusing since the camera I worked on when I was doing the dark room, etc, etc. was an old Minolta that didn't even have automatic focus.

I prefer manual focus cuz I always seem to focus on the wrong thing.

[wade moore]

DATE/LOCATION: August 18, 2007 - Bruton Parish Graveyard, Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia

SUBJECT:

I went to CW to take some pictures preparing for the FOFC Photo Challenge (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=60393) and filled up my 1gig memory card (man I need a bigger card apparently). I'm saving a lot of photos for the challenge, but found one that I really wanted to do some adjustments on. This was taken in the graveyard surrounding the historic Bruton Parish Church.

CAMERA SETTINGS:

Focal Length: 80.0mm
Exposure Time: 1/125
Aperture: f/4.5
ISO: 100

DIGITAL ENHANCEMENTS:

I used the Sharpen Effect. Then I upped the Highlights about 1/4 of the way with the Shadows and Fill Light just slightly up. Then I warmed up the color about an 1/8 of the way.

BEFORE:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6188.jpg

AFTER:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/CRW_6188-1.jpg

COMMENTS:

I really like how I was able to improve the image with the digital darkroom. But, I'm not too happy with myself on the composition. I headed out with my normally trusty 80-200 zoom lens and quickly realized it just wasn't the right tool for the shooting I would be doing in CW. As a result this is the "farthest" I could get from the Crape Myrtle. In hindsight I think I would have preferred to have the main trunk of the tree farther to the left but with the branch on the right that is partially cut-off to be fully exposed. Problem is that with the lens I had to do that I would have totally cut the headstone out, which I didn't want to do.

The other thing I would do differently is there were some renovations going on so I couldn't actually get into the graveyard. This meant that I was shooting from behind a 4 ft. brick wall. I would have loved to come at this shot from a lower angle, but it just wasn't an option at the time.

[wade moore]

Ok - I'm trying to add more commentary, if not for the benefit of the reader's then for the benefit of myself as I go back to these it will help me remember what I was thinking at the time and what I'd like to do differently in the future. It may also help me track some of my growth as I move along in this dynasty.

[Lorena]

COMMENTS:

I really like how I was able to improve the image with the digital darkroom. But, I'm not too happy with myself on the composition. I headed out with my normally trusty 80-200 zoom lens and quickly realized it just wasn't the right tool for the shooting I would be doing in CW. As a result this is the "farthest" I could get from the Crape Myrtle. In hindsight I think I would have preferred to have the main trunk of the tree farther to the left but with the branch on the right that is partially cut-off to be fully exposed. Problem is that with the lens I had to do that I would have totally cut the headstone out, which I didn't want to do.

The other thing I would do differently is there were some renovations going on so I couldn't actually get into the graveyard. This meant that I was shooting from behind a 4 ft. brick wall. I would have loved to come at this shot from a lower angle, but it just wasn't an option at the time.

The headstone adds dimension to the pic, so I'm glad you left it in there. I also like the how the branches lead my eye up, down and to the right of the photo.

The sharpening you did in post processing gives the image a lot of detail, good job!

I would probably move a tad to the left so I won't get the brick headstone (if that's what it is) on the right and include more of the headstone on the left so it's not cut off, but other than that, good job!

[wade moore]

The headstone adds dimension to the pic, so I'm glad you left it in there. I also like the how the branches lead my eye up, down and to the right of the photo.

The sharpening you did in post processing gives the image a lot of detail, good job!

I would probably move a tad to the left so I won't get the brick headstone (if that's what it is) on the right and include more of the headstone on the left so it's not cut off, but other than that, good job!

A note on the Sharpen Effect. There is no technique to it in Picasa. You merely hit "Sharpen" and it's like David Copperfield comes at your picture. I don't see any reason to not use it on every single picture I take, unless I have fuzziness on purpose. In fact, if allowed I'll probably be using it in the Photo Challenge too ;).. I don't understand how it works, but it's awesome.

I like your thoughts about how to compose the picture better next time.. the flow and odd texture to the Crape Myrtle are much of why I took the shot - I love strange looking trees, unfortunately I think many of them lose their impact in color photography - but since the Crape Myrtle was in bloom it worked well.

[wade moore]

DATE/LOCATION: August 6, 2006 14:00 - San Francisco Bay - from a boat tour

SUBJECT:

On a trip to San Francisco we took a little $10 boat tour on a whim. I took my camera with me and had a BLAST. I took a lot of photos of sail boats, the golden gate, Alcatraz, etc, etc. This is the one I chose to use for the FOFC Photography Challenge - Letter A, but I may post 1 or 2 of the others because I really like some of them.

I was trying to show the contrast of the freedom of the sailboats compared to the dreery, isolated prison with such a harsh reputation. In addition I got an unintended contrast of slants from the island and the sailboat that I believe was due to being in a boat.

CAMERA SETTINGS:

Focal Length: 300.0mm
Exposure Time: 1/750
Aperture: f/5.6
ISO: 100

DIGITAL ENHANCEMENTS:

I used the Sharpen Effect (of course). The original was very dreery, so I added quite a bit of fill light, a ton of highlights, a little bit of shadow, and cooled the photo down a bit (I'd be interested to hear if people think I cooled it too much as I think the sails did tint blue a little bit, but that was the only way to get the sky blue. With something more advanced than Picasa I could probably just do the sky, but Picasa is what I have.

BEFORE:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/Alcatraz.jpg

AFTER:

http://www.fof-woof.com/wademoore/images/Alcatraz-1.jpg

COMMENTS:

My main thing is I just wish it was a brighter day so that I had sharper shadows and a bluer sky to start with, then I wouldn't have had to adjust it so much.

[Lorena]

Wow, what a HUGE difference wade! I don't think you overdid it at all, the blues are beautiful, I can see the texture in the rocks, the trees look "healthy", the waves are more defined... well done!