Enjoy this display of Japanese Fireworks - taken last Saturday in Duesseldorf,
Germany. K10D with Tamron 28-75, f2.8, MF, ISO 1000, 1/30 or 1/40 for the
individual exposures, handheld:

[philzucker]

On my Powerbook monitor I can see all the seems. It's the black to black transitions that I'm seeing. If I turn the brightness on the monitor down enough, they go away.

I tried a levels adjustment... to make the dark colors darker.... setting the left slider to 10 made the seems go away.

I'll try to illustrate it here.

Here is your original at 100% in Photoshop. On my monitor, I can see the transitions where you've probably used the lasso tool to snag each fireworks burst.

Here, I've sketched the outlines of the rough transitions.

Here, I've adjusted the left levels indicator to 10... it makes the darks darker and pretty much leaves the bright fireworks alone. Now I no longer see the transitions.

And, here is your original with the levels adjusted - resized by flickr... but, you can make the same adjustment yourself. Or, I'd be happy to email you the file.

Hope this helps! This would look so cool printed big up on the wall!

Hey, thanks a heap for taking the time to demonstrate this!

I'm really astounded for a couple of reasons:

1) On all monitors I use I can't see the seams you mention; I use a calibrated one and they don't show up, even magnified. I also looked at the pic at a G4 15'' powerbook without seeing anything.

2) To be sure to not miss anything during PP I adjusted levels temporarily quite harshly through a adjustment level for maximum contrast in the dark regions - edges of the selections were clearly visible then. I then painted away all visible seams with a soft brush on layers masks of the single pics. Then I removed the levels adjustment. BTW: I didn't use the lasso tool - the pics were cropped during raw development and then "painted in" with layer masks.

3) As the say: The print counts! I have already done a normal sized print of this one with my Epson R800 on roll paper, and can't find any signs of seams on it.

So you see me stumped; you obviously see something I can't reproduce on my monitors, and can't see on print. The lines you've drawn to demonstrate the seams correspond roughly to my layer paintings, so you obviously see it quite clearly. But I'm a really clueless because I can't reproduce it on my gear.

The big poster sized print of it is planned, but not yet on order, and I'll have another supercritical look at my composite, blowing contrasts temporarily to extremes again to find anything that may turn up on it. And I'll probably take up your suggestion of cutting off the dark levels to a degree to be on the safe side.

Thanks again very much for taking your time helping me out here - you may have saved me a serious amount of Euros! I hate redoing expensive poster prints

Phil

[philzucker]

Awsome capture

Thanks, daacon! Much appreciated!

Phil

[hamidlmt]

Hey, thanks a heap for taking the time to demonstrate this!

I'm really astounded for a couple of reasons:

1) On all monitors I use I can't see the seams you mention; I use a calibrated one and they don't show up, even magnified. I also looked at the pic at a G4 15'' powerbook without seeing anything.

2) To be sure to not miss anything during PP I adjusted levels temporarily quite harshly through a adjustment level for maximum contrast in the dark regions - edges of the selections were clearly visible then. I then painted away all visible seams with a soft brush on layers masks of the single pics. Then I removed the levels adjustment. BTW: I didn't use the lasso tool - the pics were cropped during raw development and then "painted in" with layer masks.

3) As the say: The print counts! I have already done a normal sized print of this one with my Epson R800 on roll paper, and can't find any signs of seams on it.

So you see me stumped; you obviously see something I can't reproduce on my monitors, and can't see on print. The lines you've drawn to demonstrate the seams correspond roughly to my layer paintings, so you obviously see it quite clearly. But I'm a really clueless because I can't reproduce it on my gear.

The big poster sized print of it is planned, but not yet on order, and I'll have another supercritical look at my composite, blowing contrasts temporarily to extremes again to find anything that may turn up on it. And I'll probably take up your suggestion of cutting off the dark levels to a degree to be on the safe side.

Thanks again very much for taking your time helping me out here - you may have saved me a serious amount of Euros! I hate redoing expensive poster prints

Phil

It's strange because I'm using a 15" G4 Powerbook too (and certainly not a well calibrated device!). It's so obvious how much work you put into it so I had to share what I saw in this masterpiece!

And... Phil, you're totally right... the print does count! Man... I'd love to see this printed nice and big!

When you do the poster, let us know how it turns out!

btw...I love that there's a heart in the middle! Nicely placed.

[philzucker]

It's strange because I'm using a 15" G4 Powerbook too (and certainly not a well calibrated device!). It's so obvious how much work you put into it so I had to share what I saw in this masterpiece!

And... Phil, you're totally right... the print does count! Man... I'd love to see this printed nice and big!

When you do the poster, let us know how it turns out!

btw...I love that there's a heart in the middle! Nicely placed.

Well, thanks again very much for the time and work you put into this!!

I really love forums that can produce fruitful exchanges like this one!

Phil

[philzucker]

It's strange because I'm using a 15" G4 Powerbook too (and certainly not a well calibrated device!).

Hamidlmt: Just as a follow up. I inspected my pic again with the G4 Powerbook. As I said my first glimpse of it that seemed okay. But now viewed with more time - and from others than the "perfect" angle - I could see very clearly what you saw. God, that looked ugly! No wonder you said something about it!

I guess this has to do with the different basic gamma values Macs and Windows computers have; I reposted the image on my Pbase account now with the black levels beneath 10 cut off (as you suggested), and at least on my Powerbook it looks clean enough now.

How embarrassing - will have a close look on any composites in the future on the Mac first before publishing it. What I could now see on the Mac really was invisible on the Windows machines and on the print.

Thanks again for your posts!

Phil

[davemdsn]

Great idea and wonderful shot! I am on a calibrated monitor and I don't see the seems. Looks great to me.

[philzucker]

Great idea and wonderful shot! I am on a calibrated monitor and I don't see the seems. Looks great to me.

Thanks, Dave! Much appreciated!

You shouldn't see the seams on any monitor now (hopefully!), now that I reposted the image (substituting the original one).

Curious thing was that on my calibrated monitor of my Windows PC (and on my printer) the seams were invisible even before, but not on a Mac.

Phil

[davemdsn]

Mac does run a different Gamma setting, or at least they used to. Mac standard was 1.8 where Windows is 2.2. Might have been enough since gamma, or mid tones, would show subtle differences in black.

[SCGushue]

Hi Phil,

Nice to see you posting here. Nice idea for a pano. Maybe I'll print this one to put on my office wall We'll be even.

I have not tried doing fireworks...but once again...you inspire me. Nice to hear from you on this forum.

Stephen

[philzucker]

Hi Phil,

Nice idea for a pano. Maybe I'll print this one to put on my office wall We'll be even.

Stephen

Hi, Stephen!

Thanks very much for your comment - and you're welcome, of course!

Phil