Disregarding my entry, the two suggested videos and all other possible comparisons, the two entries
I favour the most are 1103 and 1111, although I'm not thrilled with their color (1103 is a bit
pervasively orange, 1111's non-purples are very subdued, both look good with the par's color).
The best pre-1980 interpretation is 1102.
The main problem with the default image is that the main figures of interest are indistinct,
these three present those figures strongly and with acceptable colors. Better than in the par,
Many of the entries were hindered by overly busy contrast and/or lack of color differentiation.
I found it more difficult than usual to judge the entries by their own merits and not have my
thinking colored by whether or not content from the alternate exposures was incorporated into
An uninvolved viewer wouldn't care how these images came to be, just whether or not they were
interesting to look at.
However, as a participant I am interested to know whether or not infrared imaging can make
useful contributions to color imaging. Hopefully that will become evident during these
My own entry was guided by the CNHA video which showed an infrared image with detail not evident
in the pre-1980 photograph or the default image or googled images.
My original idea was to extract a comparable b&w image from the alternate exposures and marry it
with color from a straight-up correction of the default image.
The luminosity of the panel originated from IMG0047. The figures were darkened by an auxilliary
image based on a RAW conversion with white balance fiddled to give the figures true purple color
in order to differentiate them from the orange background substrate. The bordering Foreground Rock,
Ceiling and Shadow Area are (mostly) from the straight-up correction (using a selection mask).
The curse of extra time led to changes which didn't necessarily go to a better place (flatter
shadow, more contrast in the top end, more color), but going back seemed like regression.
So in for a penny, in for a pound: 1108.