I'm looking at it on a crappo monitor at work. But from this vantage point, the wings mate nicely against the sky. No glow. I'll look again on my good monitor when I go home. But any digital image you see on the web is like a digital image from the early days of digital cameras. They're all 72dpi. To accurately evaluate the image, we'd have to get a 100% or larger crop. Paul
> http://groups.msn.com/wsawyerphotography/wildlife.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID= > 179 > > > What sort of digital artifacts? It looks fine on my > > monitors at home and work. However, it's far too small > > an image to reveal any sharpening artifacts or CA. > > Can you describe what you're seeing? > > I'll try... but note that I'm probably calling it the wrong thing (i guess > "artifacts" is a specific term, should've used another). Anyhow, what I > see is that each bird seems to have like a "digital glow", for lack of a > better term... like the "buzz" lines you see around alarm clocks drawn in > cartoons. There's probably a term for it, but I haven't a clue. I > double-checked, and it turns out that I see it on my laptop as well, but > it's not as pronounced. Maybe it's an LCD thing... I haven't a clue. But > wow... now you have me wondering, am I the only one that sees it? It looks > like a digital photo from 5/10 years ago; or a photo taken with a really > cheap lens (which I know it wasn't). In addition, nothing is particularly > in focus / sharp. I can barely make out the eyes, or any other details, on > the landing heron in the center. > > None of the other photos in Bill's gallery have this problem (the others > are quite nice, in fact)... so I'm figuring that it's gotta be the photo. > Lemme know, Paul. > > - Jerome (who perhaps is going selectively blind) >
