>>> The Macro and Close Up Fortnightly Thread. #2 (Textures) <<<

Welcome to the Macro and Close Up Fortnightly Thread. #2 (Textures)

Our Forum Guide Lines may be found here.
dprevived.com/t/macro-and-close-up-fortnightly-thread/7742/post/110318/

G'day, all,

Thanks for all the great contributions of the last fortnight.
It's been a pleasure and an education to look at them.

This time, I thought we could have a look at your Textures.
Stuff can look pretty different close-up and here is your chance to show off some creativity.
Let's concentrate on the surface, not the subject. The unexpected is fine.
Remember, we are fortnightly, so you have plenty of time to set up something new and awesome.
I strongly urge first-timers to jump in, the Forum water is fine.

Ron

Here's mine, a little patch of very ordinary Gippsland mudstone, shot in full shadow, so it's lifted a LONG way.
You can clearly see the next flakes to fall off, on their way.
A7R handheld, Sony FE 20/1.8, 1/30, F8, ISO 250, EV +0.7, A mode, Multi-metering.

A really beautiful image: the texture, the tracing of lines, the soft play of lights and shadows and those two complementary colors...

Alan, you took great advantage of that hard, raking light to highlight the textures...

Mmmm… this is the most appropriate for the theme that I could find...

To see the texture in Windows FireFox, open in a new tab or window and click once in the middle ...

Cactus pear, called a tuna here:

Mulberry leaf atop a trash can:

enjoy ....

Or, right click in the picture and Open Link in New Tab.
Agree. Definitely faster.
IQ looks OK, too ?
Thanks for those.

Ron

'and it worked.
Almost went that way myself, trees are us; but remembered the stone shot.

Ron

Nice contrast in the subject vs the background, can't beat Autumn Colour.

Ron

Original Post is here:
dprevived.com/t/the-macro-and-close-up-fortnightly-thread-2-textures/7789/post/111097/

Far too kind,
Antelope Canyon it 'aint, but it's always nice to see something in there, bring it home and extract a version you like.
We're not blessed with the spectacular around here, our landscape is seriously old, so it's working with what you get, as ever.

Ron

I liked the texture on this

13-10 chestnut 250 + 10 + 16-134478 by softmarmotte1, on Flickr

Original Post is here :
dprevived.com/t/the-macro-and-close-up-fortnightly-thread-2-textures/7789/post/111187/

Seriously close, now we're talking.
(and thanks for the I.D. too, could have been Alien Brain for mine !)

Ron

I like the texture on the eye (view up close to see it)

Original Post is here:
dprevived.com/t/the-macro-and-close-up-fortnightly-thread-2-textures/7789/post/111205/

Indeed.
FWIW: I think there's bit of Luminance NR still in it.
It does nothing for the eye (which is pretty much on the pixel limit)
but the body does clean up a little bit ? (Viewing distance applies, as usual.)
(Of course, if you own super-duper NR software, pay this no heed !)
Great colours.

Ron

I had already run it through ON1's AI noise / sharpening. I am not sure how customisable it is. I don't play with it a lot because although my laptop has a GPU that works, it doesn't have the grunt and I don't have the patience to wait all the time.

Thanks Ron

This is Lucy, our resident Blue Tongue.
She's here to remind you textures come in animate and inanimate forms,
(and, you still have a week to pick up a cam and shoot some !)

Ron

OK, I said I'd raise a post for comment on using Thumbnails in replies.

It's been 9 days since anything new hit the "Idea for images in quoted text" thread.
dprevived.com/t/idea-for-images-in-quoted-text/7775/post/110913/
So if anything does come of it, it'll be a while (?).

So, I just to want to poll this Forum on what members here think/want.

FWIW: I have no objection to continue using them in my replies, it's work; but for mine, it does reduce clutter.
Several samples are now visible in the 2nd Fortnight thread.
e.g. dprevived.com/t/the-macro-and-close-up-fortnightly-thread-2-textures/7789/post/111201/
Obviously, there is no imperative for other members here to adopt it.
Let me know your thoughts, I'm happy to go with the flow.

Ron

I think it is a good idea.

My rationale is that reducing clutter is a good thing. I don't like wasting time scrolling through page after page of a large stack of images that I have already seen. Smaller thumbnails are enough for a reference or to remind what the images were.
User interface and utility was always ingrained in me. In the early PC days there was a time when a poor interface / menus etc would not go well with established users / reviewers. Unfortunately that was let slide when the great unwashed couldn't get their head around structured things and companies like microsoft threw out all their UI research and dumbed everything down.
As long as the smaller thumbnails are still clickable for a refresher if wanted (although the link to the OP would cover that).