If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
Since there are quite a few her who devote time to processing and I
generally do not, I thought I might as well post one of the rare images that I did subject to considerable alteration: https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/...12762295_o.jpg NOTE: Before this was printed, the orientation was corrected and it was cropped right at the fence line. (Each time it's printed I vary it slightly.) The print is about 20" x 30" and in shows always grabs a lot of attention. I don't think the original would have been more than glanced at. The original was in color and of not much interest. This one was done in GIMP and is close to the old darkroom technique of solarization. Filters Edge detect Edge A five second editing job. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 2014-10-20 13:27:48 +0000, philo* said:
Since there are quite a few her who devote time to processing and I generally do not, I thought I might as well post one of the rare images that I did subject to considerable alteration: https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/...12762295_o.jpg NOTE: Before this was printed, the orientation was corrected and it was cropped right at the fence line. (Each time it's printed I vary it slightly.) The print is about 20" x 30" and in shows always grabs a lot of attention. I don't think the original would have been more than glanced at. I guess this is where taste comes into play. This shot and your treatment doesn’t work for me. Peter might find it to his liking. I can see that it would “grab a lot of attention”, but whether that is a good thing or not might be open to interpretation. Since you presented it at 20’’ x 30’’ that attention would have been unavoidable. This might well be a case of the "Emperor's new clothes". The original was in color and of not much interest. Actually, beyond what you have done to it, it remains of not much interest. This one was done in GIMP and is close to the old darkroom technique of solarization. So? Filters Edge detect Edge A five second editing job. It shows. You definitely need more practice. Either that, or stick to your tried and true “get it right in camera” technique. It takes more than post processing the "rare image" to become in anyway proficient with whatever software you choose to use. One of the reasons I return to photographs I shot 12+ years ago, is I have learned other PP techniques and I have moved on from those days of starting out with a digital darkroom. That allows be to get to improved versions on older photographs. Post processing is not a bad thing, but using any tool on rare occasions can lead to questionable results. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 09:15 AM, Savageduck wrote:
X Post processing is not a bad thing, but using any tool on rare occasions can lead to questionable results. snip I don't agree with much of what you have posted but you are of course entitled to your opinion. No two people have ever interpreted one of my photos in the same way. I consider myself fortunate in that all these years I have had employment other than in the field of photography, so never had to depend on sales. All photos I do are solely for my own enjoyment and I am not swayed by opinion. OTOH: If I do somehow stumble upon producing a photo that sells, I am not too proud to take the money. This is one of my "sellers". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 09:26 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 20 October 2014 14:27:48 UTC+1, philo wrote: Since there are quite a few her who devote time to processing and I generally do not, I thought I might as well post one of the rare images that I did subject to considerable alteration: I quite like it. Thank you. When I put this one in shows, even the critics who normally don't care for my stuff...like this one. https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/...12762295_o.jpg NOTE: Before this was printed, the orientation was corrected and it was cropped right at the fence line. Was going to mention the tilt. Yeah, I put this one on-line and only realized it was not the final cut after I posted it...but it's close enough. This one was done in GIMP and is close to the old darkroom technique of solarization. That was one of my first attempts at solarization, in order to make something out of an otherwise quite borring photo. Filters Edge detect Edge This info was put there for those old school folks who used solarization. Should save any GIMP user some trial and error as GIMP has no setting specifically marked "solarize". |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 09:35 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
snip I rather like the effect. It shows that you can see what can be done with a photograph you'd normally skip over. The result is strong and eye-catching. Thank you very much. I did not post the original as there is just not much to look at. The effect "saved the day". Sometimes going beyond just black and white and reducing the elements starkly can work. This was a rather ordinary shot of one of my grandsons that I like better than a lot of my regular shots. http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Miscel...10-07-1-X2.jpg Yes...such things can really save what would otherwise be a "nothing" image. Many years ago my wife and I taught a photography class for adults who have experience mental illness. Unfortunately many were over-medicated and could not do much more than walk out the door and just take a quick snap shot of the first thing that hit their eye. The results were disappointing until we got an idea. The one that started it all was a guy who just took a photo of a sewer cover in the side walk. We printed it out on plain paper just as you have done with your example. A strict black and white with no gradation. That made the boring image of /some/ interest. This was along time ago in the pre-Photoshop days and done on a photo copier. We could have left it at that but we added another level: We'd give the image back to the original photographer and have them color it in with pastels, crayon or colored pencil. Again we got interesting results...but the images were of course not archival. So, we took the images to a color photo-copying center and had them enlarged and printed on semi-gloss. We were astounded that the brilliance was brought out in such a way that they were considerably better than the original. The ended up putting the photos in their gift shop and selling them. My wife did her own rendition of the sewer cover photo and it looks like the planet Jupiter setting over Lake Michigan. To this day, my wife and I still teach out xerography classes...but thanks to the computer can shrink a three week process down to an hour or so. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 10:00 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
snip yes people always argue as to which photos are best. Whn you search for such things, I prefer to look at the images and then decide rather than the photographers name or the camera they used. or you could argue that the best photo is the one that makes the most money. I wonder hgow much that photo of the women tennis playing scratching here arse is worth, and is it a good photo. There is just too much of that going on. I've seen so many critics raving about stuff that I think is junk that I'd almost be worried if they liked my stuff. Ok you say, isn't this subjective? Sure...but : One of the local critics is always raving about a certain gallery here in town...so what the heck my wife and I decided to check it out. On display were those old wooden tennis rackets with novelty store "doggy doo" glued to them. Now you tell me if that is art. Maybe I did not get enough education? sheesh |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 2014-10-20 14:29:02 +0000, philo* said:
On 10/20/2014 09:15 AM, Savageduck wrote: X Post processing is not a bad thing, but using any tool on rare occasions can lead to questionable results. snip I don't agree with much of what you have posted but you are of course entitled to your opinion. No two people have ever interpreted one of my photos in the same way. I consider myself fortunate in that all these years I have had employment other than in the field of photography, so never had to depend on sales. All photos I do are solely for my own enjoyment and I am not swayed by opinion. OTOH: If I do somehow stumble upon producing a photo that sells, I am not too proud to take the money. This is one of my "sellers". There is no accounting for taste. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 10:15 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-10-20 14:29:02 +0000, philo said: On 10/20/2014 09:15 AM, Savageduck wrote: X Post processing is not a bad thing, but using any tool on rare occasions can lead to questionable results. snip I don't agree with much of what you have posted but you are of course entitled to your opinion. No two people have ever interpreted one of my photos in the same way. I consider myself fortunate in that all these years I have had employment other than in the field of photography, so never had to depend on sales. All photos I do are solely for my own enjoyment and I am not swayed by opinion. OTOH: If I do somehow stumble upon producing a photo that sells, I am not too proud to take the money. This is one of my "sellers". There is no accounting for taste. " De gustibus non est disputandum." True and no problem with that, the only problem I do see however is that you have not demonstrated the ability to /qualify/ your opinions. Your name "Savage Duck" implies that you harbor a lot of anger and I see that it's clouding your judgment. Such opinions do nothing to further the art of photography. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
Took me a while but here is the xerograph of the sewer cover https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.n...6318c2b9b314e8 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Processing
On 10/20/2014 9:27 AM, philo wrote:
Since there are quite a few her who devote time to processing and I generally do not, I thought I might as well post one of the rare images that I did subject to considerable alteration: https://scontent-a-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/...12762295_o.jpg NOTE: Before this was printed, the orientation was corrected and it was cropped right at the fence line. (Each time it's printed I vary it slightly.) The print is about 20" x 30" and in shows always grabs a lot of attention. I don't think the original would have been more than glanced at. The original was in color and of not much interest. This one was done in GIMP and is close to the old darkroom technique of solarization. Filters Edge detect Edge A five second editing job. I saw two pictures. Took your shot, cropped it, and ran a fid edge filter. I was too lazy to clean the background: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/philo1%20left.jpg and the right side: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/philo1right.jpg -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
T Max processing | Michael[_6_] | In The Darkroom | 4 | January 3rd 08 04:57 AM |
Processing | No Name | Large Format Photography Equipment | 15 | October 21st 07 01:50 PM |
Post-Processing RAW vs Post-Processing TIFF | Mike Henley | Digital Photography | 54 | January 30th 05 08:26 AM |
E6 Processing | Mike | In The Darkroom | 68 | December 8th 04 05:14 AM |
K14 Processing | Joe Thomas | Film & Labs | 1 | December 17th 03 10:04 PM |