WC #327 - Cedar Bluff Reservoir

The original, resized only--actually had to up size it because the original was only 640x480

Interesting, Rob. Using the Orton effect turns this from a pleasant image into an image with a mysterious quality to it.
Nice treatment.
I'm beginning to think that some of these earlier cameras had a lot going for them.

Thanks for posting.

Carol

I agree with Carol and you still managed to get a crop out of it Rob, nice work.

So does the water level in this rise and fall quite a bit each year Rob, or was it mainly just those years. Just curious since I won't get a chance to ever see it.

All the best Rob, nice shot from the Oly (uzi's are nice with the zoom) and excellent effect sir.

Danny.

Thanks Carol and Danny.

Danny, Cedar Bluff usually just goes down. '93/'95 were flood years across much of Kansas and raised lake levels everywhere. I remember in '95 fishing at another reservoir, wading waist deep in what was normally a parking lot :). Last year, Cedar Bluff came up a little, but as I recall most of the flooding rains were just east of the lake. Part of the problem is that the lake is used for irrigation and drinking water and lays in a drier portion of the state. It'll still be a long time before it reaches the low levels of the 70s/80s, if it is ever allowed to go that low again.

Interesting Rob, thanks for that. so fishing in a parking lot huh, amazing how it can rise like that, even in severe conditions. We just lost 6 teenage kids and a teacher here with a flash flood that were canyoning at the time. So mother nature is capable of anything Rob.

All the best Rob and thanks mate, fascinating read.

Danny.

Nice scenic, Rob. I like the original better. The details look soft and muddy with the ortonized version. It just makes it look like the lens was smudged or it was shot through a plastic window. The original is actuall fairly sharp and the exposure is perfect.

Rob:
I was hesitant to make a comment when I first looked at this, but my thoughts were similar to Gary's. I think the original is very, very good and I actually like the original better than the modernized version. I do get a greater sense of depth if I look at the modified image from a distance with my eyes crossed. I think Carol mentioned this in another post - the old cameras weren't all that bad and if we had the currently available software for post-processing, the output from the older cameras would have been even more impressive. Just my opinion.
David Sparks

Interesting, Rob, i actually think the ortonized version works well here, and i generally dont really like that technique. Congrats!