Post #4353246
2026-08-03 11:28 UTC
@siblingsofthevoid@void.lgbt Thanks for the compliments :blob_cat_blush: and the advice! I also had a look and I do like what you do with landscape :blob_cat_aww:
As you maybe saw, the pictures you linked (mine) were taken with my film camera (it's a scan of the negative), so I don't have a RAW to work with. Still, I could do a bit of editing. Actually I did some on several film pictures scans but using GIMP, mostly tweaking the curves to correct over- or under-exposure, and sometimes trying to denoise some of the underexposed ones, though that's tricky. I don't think I touched those ones, though. The thing is, I absolutely love how they turned out but it's nothing like the scene looked like: the library lighting is actually very warm and pleasant, it's completely different from that sickly green hue, it was a complete surprise when I got them developed (and again, I loved it!). It was a special "retro" film I got from cheap at my local photo lab and I think it has a unusual chemistry that does something weird with the spectrum of that specific lighting.
Replies (1)
-
@siblingsofthevoid@void.lgbt 2026-08-03 11:38
@miranda_blue@eldritch.cafe Thank you very much ^^ The happy accidents often make for some of the most amazing pictures we ever take. And really, most of the time, minor correction is really all a picture needs. If it needs more i tend to go back to the... wait the drawing board doesn't work here... I go back and take another few shots in the same location but with different light. e.g. Yak don't look great during an overcast day. They kinda look sad. Their fur just doesn't glow like it does with warm light.