No thanks, not at all necessary. Please read my reply to nightski and my first reply to Billyspad. For your information, a far more accurate colour value test method is to take an eyedropper sample and read the values for each channel.

Please read my previous post, I said the whole image was over processed, the whole tent area measures 255 X 3. One of my pet hates is blown highlights, do you think I would note the relatively small nitpicks in Billyspad's photo and miss that in this this abomination?

Because there is a term "achromatic" and because there are new people wishing to learn I felt that I had to correct things or there might be a degree of misunderstanding out there.

Oh dear.

It would of course have been a snip to remove the wires but as they are absolutely essential to the structure and an indispensable part of the subject it would have appeared most unnatural and unnerving to any circus buff or weekend camper to have been denied being able to see them.

Phew Billyspad, I found this for you and for a moment I was worried. I'm so glad you saw my overdone PP and that it was you who first responded. No-one needs to say any more thanks because Billy and I are now even. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

So after getting all worked up about being ripped off you now find out that the Nikon accessory list for that lens does show the case and the hood as optional extras. Did you go back to Nikon and apologize? In any case, a non OEM lens hood which can do exactly the same simple job, can be purchased on Ebay for under ten bucks.

Seeing as though I played critic today I guess I should put up myself.

I was driving in the countryside and slowing to enter a small town I glimpsed just the the very top of this Bigtop. To my wife's bemusement, I backtracked with some difficulty as there was much traffic, and finally made this shot. D7100 + Nikkor 18-200.

(Download)

Thanks Billyspad, I was a bit worried that you might be offended by my being candid, especially since this is my first airing here. Other than the processing, your photograph is a well constructed and interesting study which might present well in mono but do rethink your semi-saturated rendition, perhaps paying better attention to colour balance and selection criteria.

You may wish to dismiss my "concerns" as merely the rantings of a nitpicker or you can choose to review my observations objectively. It is this sort of attention to detail that sets apart a competent photo editor from a near enough is good enough finger painter.

I don't believe it's a monitor or UHH upload issue. This is a critique site and you have invited opinion on how to better your photography.

It is apparent that quite a bit of processing has been carried out. You have applied a degree of selective desaturation but unfortunately in some areas your selection has been somewhat imprecise. Where you have selected her hair for instance. Another problem is the colour bleeding from the right hand area of her shirt and her foot exhibits a desaturated area. My initial concern however remains as the overall purple cast that the image has, which is also evident in the darker areas of the otherwise apparently desaturated areas.

There is such a thing as an "achromatic" lens design which reduces the effects of chromatic aberration. Accuracy is essential when making reference to technical terms.

You are correct in saying that W/B problems will not create C/A fringing.

The term is "chromatic aberration" not "achromatic" and the "purple fringing around the lady's left shoulder and upper arm" is not an example of the phenomenon in this case.

No, I mean that the whole shot has a purple tinge to it. Looks like a white balance problem.

Her skin looks purple. Spoils a good shot.