| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/02/2006 02:03:14 AM · #451 |
I don't see any leading line here, in the sense we are talking about. I see a complex structure with a curved perimeter, so to speak, but it isn't taking me to or from anywhere visually.
Again, I don't see this as a leading line; more as a complex, dettailed wedge shape. Compositionally, this image is simply divided into two opposing triangles, and it is actually, considering the strength of the fiagonal, a remarkably static image.
By and large, the use of "leading lines" presumes some sort of dynamic flow to the image, not the balancing of one half against the other.
Here's an image that straddles the line between a diagonally balanced composition and a strong leading line, with a beginning and a destination, that is also a subject:
In the MQuinn shot above, what is the "subject"? Where does the photographer want us to go, and why does he want us to go there?
R.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2006 04:33:52 AM · #452 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Is this any closer to what you were seeing?
I am getting some edge artifacting here, which I could clean up if I took the time, but it's a relatively laborious project to do so. This was a very difficult image on which to work, and to be honest I'm not sure why. It clocked up very easily, and even slight color tweaks showed sudden increases in artifacting.
This was done with one set of straight contrast maks, then a second shadow mask at soft light and faded. Hue/sat was used as much as possible, but the yellow channel was hard to run without making the sky and some of the water very strange. I'm making it a point to do all this without local, hand-made selections, which anyway would create real problems in the tree/sky interface, which is where I really want to be bale to use color adjustments (the trees, that is). Anyhow, finally I made a separate, duplicate layer of the whole and dodged the brighter areas on the foreground rocks and then brushed them with the saturation sponge to bring up a hint of color. Added and faded a sky gradient also.
It's a work in progress, that's for sure. Whatcha think?
R.
Oh yeah, I rotated it too to level it up... |
Yes, much closer than what I've been able to get. I am almost relieved to hear that it is indeed a hard image to work on -- make me feel a bit better about not being able to do much of anything with it.
A work in progress it is. At least I have an image I can keep coming back to as a way of measuring my learning. Maybe someday I will be able to do something with it.
Thanks for taking the time to look it over.
David
|
|
|
|
05/02/2006 10:57:18 AM · #453 |
Some thoughts on leading lines...
Almost every image contains some sort of lines that lead somewhere. For me the two prominent characteristics that define a "good" leading lines image FOR ME are:
1-The leading line(s) "lead" somewhere, usually the main subject.
2-The image is dependent on the leading line(s) for it's impact.
I won't brag these are GOOD pictures, but here are some leading line images from my own photography:
According to some this is a classic leading line image for someone from western civilization. It enters from the lower left. Supposedly it is the most natural way for those of us under the influence of western civilization to see things. We scan starting from the lower left. Other cultures do things differently. It also shows that a leading line does not necessarily have to be straight.
As a leading line the road draws viewer attention into the image. The "destination" and intended main subject are the mountains and lightning. That is the where the leading line leads.
This image has four leading lines, one from each corner. The distant, open gate is the physical "somewhere" the lines lead the viewer to. But there is a lot more to it. I composed it specifically this way to emphaisize the ominous nature of a prison. Prisons are dark, foreboding places. I thought the use of those leading lines to that darkly inviting open gate conveyed that feeling exceptionally well. Without the lines this image would lose much of its impact.
This image uses a radiant of lines to draw viewer attention to the mountain sihlouette and the exact point where the sun will soon emerge. It also shows the viewer an almost religious presence in nature. Without the leading lines this image would lose much of its impact.
This last one is an example that the "destination" of leading lines is not necessarily something physically within the frame. Here the freeway lines and truck lead off to infinity. Infinity is the destination the leading lines "lead" the viewer to.
Some might legitimately argue that this last one isn't really a good example of leading lines. That is because it actually leads the viewer outside the picture and not into it as well behaved leading lines should.
I took this picture near the end of a 1,300 mile non-stop 26 hour drive(longer due to pit stops to take pictures. :) ). To me it conveyed the seemingly unending nature of such a trip better than any other picture I took on that drive.
Photographic "destinations" or main subjects can sometimes be more metaphysical than physical. One thing certain, this image is abslutely dependant on leading lines. Sometimes, the journey is the reward.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2006 11:35:07 PM · #454 |
Alright y'all, here's my Leading Lines piece. A bit conventional, but it works (at least, I think it does). I'll be curious to hear comments from anyone.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 09:12:42 AM · #455 |
Hi, just checking in quickly as I am fashionably late to this party.
I'm reading through the thread and learning a TON! Thanks a bunch for putting it up and everyone for contributing. I've still got several pages to go to catch up, but wanted to let you know it is a great learning experience and to keep it going, lessons and the PP information.
I haven't even had time to look through any images to see what I can do with them using what I have learned, but you definitely give me hope that some of the ones I had written off as crap actually could look very nice. |
|
|
|
05/03/2006 01:27:46 PM · #456 |
Thanks Steve Davidson and Odyssey.
I'd like to see some discussion of whether any of these pictures seem "more" leading-lines than others, and if so why? I'd like people to consider that leading lines is a compositional element that is often overlaid on OTHER composional models; i.e., a rule-of-thirds landscape that incorporates a leading line. I'm particularly interested in whether people believe Oddyssey's shot or steve's radial sunrays are good examples of leading lines.
While you're at it, consider modifying the composition of Odyssey's shot, and discuss whether that A) improves the picture, and B) accentuates or plays down the leading lines aspect.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 01:34:50 PM · #457 |
| I've been swamped with work and my camera hasn't been out of the bag in nearly a week. I am still watching this until things settle back down to normal. Thanks tons! |
|
|
|
05/03/2006 02:02:47 PM · #458 |
| I haven't had time or desire to shoot much lately either.. might 'cheat' and re-edit my county road shot since it has leading lines :p |
|
|
|
05/03/2006 06:36:06 PM · #459 |
I thought Steve's sunrays was an intersting take on "leading lines" - not something I would have expected. But I do think it counts. It seems that most leading line shots tend toward a "hard" line: fences, roads, breakwaters, etc. The sunrays are more of a soft line and seem to lead the eye down to the silhouetted rocks, or back out of them - as opposed to the usual lines, which lead to another part of the image, deeper in to it. While there is a sense of depth to the sunrays, I don't find it to be as strong as a solid line has.
I think that both mine and Steve's shots are examples of leading lines, although both non-standard. I also think that they both work, in somewhat different ways. And I think that as an element, leading lines are used in conjunction with others for better effect. Both the pics in question have the Rule of Thirds going for them. In general, I think that a shot that used only leading lines, without other elements, would come out lack-luster. (Now someone will post something amazing that does this and blow my theory out of the water.)
In terms of modifying my shot, there are a few options I can think of. The road dominates the central vertical region and could be offset to one side (probably the right, to maintain the curve in the distance). In fact, it could be cropped in (or reshot) so that the image begins closer to the curve, which would be used more prominantly to show depth and movement, leading the eye through the image more, instead of just down it.
Critiquing my own work is difficult like this, since I tend to view it through my mindset. I'll be interested to hear what others have to say about it.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 06:48:49 PM · #460 |
Originally posted by OdysseyF22:
|
Okay. Look at the following crop. Is it stronger or weaker as far as the image goes? Is it more or less of a "leading lines" image?
Explain your reasoning.
R.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 07:11:02 PM · #461 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by OdysseyF22:
|
Okay. Look at the following crop. Is it stronger or weaker as far as the image goes? Is it more or less of a "leading lines" image?
Explain your reasoning. |
If I'd have commented earlier this is EXACTLY what I would have suggested for recropping the original image. It is stronger because it reduces the importance of the road itself while better emphasizing the trees where the leading lines "lead". In the original the road occupies more foreground image real estate than it needs and it just "feels" better to crop it closer where at lease one side of the road enters from a corner.
I agree even more with OdysseyF22's suggestion of offseting perspective to the right side of the road. That would mean retaking the picture, I think. This is just a bit to much of a "strait on" view.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 07:18:51 PM · #462 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
|
Regarding this one the only thing the leading lines do is provide added value support that strengthens the composition and directs viewer attention to the most interesting part of the image. It probably could use less sky on the very top. Without the lines it is a less than ordinary sunrise. (Not saying is particularly extraordinary sunrise with them. LOL!!)
|
|
|
|
05/03/2006 07:21:00 PM · #463 |
| For my 2 cents, I would say the cropped image concentrates the effects of the roadside perspective lines. But in doing so it calls for a little cropping on the sky-side. That being said one ends up with a landscape format image. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 12:02:16 AM · #464 |
I've read through the entire thread, learned a TON, need much practice, and really grateful for the lessons.
Here's my try at what I have learned so far.
Original image (taken as jpeg):
Altered w/ 2 passes at contrast masking, blue gradient in sky, reddish gradient on ground (faded way out because it added to things, but looked fake if too opaque), cropped out the distracting road and tree on right side. I think that's all I did.
I like it. I don't feel like it is done, but more interesting than the original. I had originally considered it as an example of leading lines, but I think there are too many of them and they lead in different directions. While they are important to the shot, they don't in my opinion lead me to a specific subject. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 12:32:02 AM · #465 |
Cropped, dodged & burned natural leading lines.Desat sky to de-empnasize, eye should follow road. Burned the bend at the end.
Message edited by author 2006-05-04 00:32:57. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 12:44:57 AM · #466 |
Originally posted by rblanton:
Cropped, dodged & burned natural leading lines.Desat sky to de-empnasize, eye should follow road. Burned the bend at the end. |
This is cool. You've taken an image that was mine and made it yours - that's quite an accomplishment. It looks wholly different this way, and while I am fond of the original, I like this a lot better for several reasons. It's stronger, more centered on the leading lines of the road, and I feel like it draws me into the picture more than it did before.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2006 01:02:31 AM · #467 |
Originally posted by cycleboy:
Here's my try at what I have learned so far.
Original image (taken as jpeg):
|
It seems to me that in your original, the leading line of the one fence takes you to the tree (subject). Now that you have cropped out the tree, there is nothing to stop the eye from going right out of the picture. I would also suggest that cropping a bit off the sky and the left side of the shot might help. IMO, you could probably also add some more contrast to the foreground to emphasize the shadows more.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2006 01:03:52 AM · #468 |
My feeling was the sky was taking me out of the shot, also, I wanted to see the road offset, even hit the ROT if possible. Next I looked for faint lines, dark or light, and worked with them. I get lots of practice doing this. I have yet to develop the photographers eye which allows me to take the right crop and not find it in PS later. I read that is the mark of pros, taking the shot that needs little if any cropping. I am far from that. Happy to do this, it was a fun excercise.
Message edited by author 2006-05-04 01:05:35. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 01:28:35 AM · #469 |
If I may, here is my contribution to a leading line shot.
Original:  Editted: 
To me my subject is the light post which the lines of the pathway draw you towards. I chose my crop to put less emphasis on the path itself but use it to direct you more towards the lamp.
edit to add: I think that the crop that Bear_music did of odyssey's shot is stronger than the original because it brings you closer to the subject but I like the crop that rblanton did as well.
Message edited by author 2006-05-04 01:33:14. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 02:18:41 AM · #470 |
Do leading lines always take you deeper. I shot this scene as I was intrigued by all the lines leading to the boat. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 09:24:31 AM · #471 |
Originally posted by Prism:
Originally posted by cycleboy:
Here's my try at what I have learned so far.
Original image (taken as jpeg):
|
It seems to me that in your original, the leading line of the one fence takes you to the tree (subject). Now that you have cropped out the tree, there is nothing to stop the eye from going right out of the picture. I would also suggest that cropping a bit off the sky and the left side of the shot might help. IMO, you could probably also add some more contrast to the foreground to emphasize the shadows more. |
Interesting. I honestly didn't like the tree - perhaps in part because including it meant I would have to include the ugly roadside marker posts (or try to erase them, which I have zero experience with). I did try cropping out some of the left side where the sun is, but the sunburst seemed important and if I cropped out part of it to where just the rays were in the shot, it looked weird.
Thanks for the thoughts, this is all about trying different things and seeing things in different ways. This thread has really taught me to look at some of my images I had originally set aside as junk because they may just have potential. I was amazed by the tropical island shot - Robert's transformation of that one is awesome. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 10:15:51 AM · #472 |
I included a link to several before and after edits of many photos shown in this post, these were treated with Fred Mirandas Velva Vision Plugin all with the same settings. His pluin does wonders on landscapes. Note: all photos were treated with the same setting, im several cases the treatment could have been overdone. In the zip file are the original and the treated version layered in a ps document, simply turn off the original layer to see the velva vision version.
BERORE AND AFTER ZIP |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 10:46:18 AM · #473 |
Originally posted by cycleboy:
Interesting. I honestly didn't like the tree - perhaps in part because including it meant I would have to include the ugly roadside marker posts (or try to erase them, which I have zero experience with). I did try cropping out some of the left side where the sun is, but the sunburst seemed important and if I cropped out part of it to where just the rays were in the shot, it looked weird.
Thanks for the thoughts, this is all about trying different things and seeing things in different ways. This thread has really taught me to look at some of my images I had originally set aside as junk because they may just have potential. I was amazed by the tropical island shot - Robert's transformation of that one is awesome. |
I didn't mean to crop the whole sunburst out because I agree it is a large part of what makes the picture. Only a small portion of it. As for cloning the posts out, always good to learn new skills..;)
I tried here with PSP9 to give you an idea of what I meant. My PP skills are nothing compared to bear_music but I hope you don't mind my giving it a shot.
This is an awesome learning thread and I really appreciate the time taken by all of the contributors to share their knowledge and skills. |
|
|
|
05/04/2006 01:51:39 PM · #474 |
Originally posted by rblanton:
Do leading lines always take you deeper. I shot this scene as I was intrigued by all the lines leading to the boat. |
Leading lines can take you into a shot, they can lead you TO a subject or AWAY from one, they can lead you OUT of the shot, but by definition they need to "lead". These horizontal lines, nice as they are, don't look like "leading" lines to me.
R.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2006 01:56:07 PM · #475 |
Originally posted by Prism:
If I may, here is my contribution to a leading line shot.
Original: Editted:
To me my subject is the light post which the lines of the pathway draw you towards. I chose my crop to put less emphasis on the path itself but use it to direct you more towards the lamp.
edit to add: I think that the crop that Bear_music did of odyssey's shot is stronger than the original because it brings you closer to the subject but I like the crop that rblanton did as well. |
You've clearly improved this shot dramatically. It's hard for me to jusge it critically because I'm workking with my skylight blasting my desk, and so I can't really see the darker version very well. If it's not too dark, you're in business. Certainly, the cropping EMPHASIZES the leading lines aspect, just as cropping oddyssey's shot does. There's a lesson there: less can definitely be more when it comes to leading lines.
Regarding the crop on Odyssey's shot, I too like what rblanton did, but that's a whole new picture and my goal in "my" crop was just to show what could be accomplished by whacking off most of the foreground and how that affected the strength of the leading lines.
Robt.
|
|
