| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/31/2007 12:16:49 AM · #1 |
Impressionism Results
This is going to be fun!
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 12:20:32 AM · #2 |
I feel some blur comin' on.
HEE HEE |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 03:13:21 AM · #3 |
What a great idea. Now I don't have to decide between bokeh and power - I can do both (hehe).
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 03:21:55 AM · #4 |
| just curious, why a member challenge on Thursday night? Is this a schedule change I missed? |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 03:23:08 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by LevT:
just curious, why a member challenge on Thursday night? Is this a schedule change I missed? |
I think it's just an extra challenge, the regular member challenge (Motivational Poster II) is still up. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 05:49:40 AM · #6 |
wauw...this is gonna be a hard challenge...
*think*think*
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 06:01:26 AM · #7 |
| Well I have just gotten a great idea but now I am hoping I can pull it off. I have to really nut this one out to get the result I am envisioning. |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 06:24:40 AM · #8 |
Anybody got a link to Impressionism I?
Oh, DUH!!! Never mind!
Impressionism Results
I'm soooooooo shocked  scalvert won!
NOT!!!
Message edited by author 2007-08-31 06:27:02.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 09:46:03 AM · #9 |
Although not all of these work, many do. Check out the 30 days of blur thread:
30 days of blur
and also the wikipedia information on the Impressionism period, in art:
Impressionism |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 09:53:57 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Anybody got a link to Impressionism I?
Oh, DUH!!! Never mind!
Impressionism Results
I'm soooooooo shocked scalvert won!
NOT!!! |
Also worth noting that the only image in the top 10 that wasn't 'all' impressionistic/ blurry won.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:46:15 AM · #11 |
Ok... seems that if it has a person and some flowers and isn't necessarily in focus, in pastel shades, you've hit it on the head.
I'm a little unsure how to go about shooting this but I might suprise myself. Maybe some flowers in a field or something, and with it being advanced it gives us a lot more scope to mess with things... hmm. Here's to the learning curve.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 11:55:53 AM · #12 |
It's a good opportunity for you all to head to the library and read Patterson/Gallant: Photo Impressionism!
It's not just blur. From the book:
"The depiction in photography of emotion or character by details intended ot achieve a vividness or effectiveness more by invoking subjective and sensory impressions than by re-creating an objective reality."
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 12:13:43 PM · #13 |
| Does it have to have color? I'm kinda limited to beige.... :-) |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 12:24:03 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Tez:
Ok... seems that if it has a person and some flowers and isn't necessarily in focus, in pastel shades, you've hit it on the head. |
Maybe. But the real quality of impressionism is light and how you use it.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2007 05:45:59 PM · #15 |
| Oh just noticed this, very cool (if not a little daunting for the sharpness needy like myself - GRIN!) |
|
|
|
08/31/2007 07:12:27 PM · #16 |
| Yippee...I haven't been motivated the last week...but, now I'm really excited!! This is going to be fun! |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 01:48:05 AM · #17 |
| So the idea is to make it look like an impressionist painting? Because I was a bit confused there for a while... I thought we were supposed to use the same techniques as the painters but do it with photography, not just try to emulate the look of their paintings. That makes things a bit easier. |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 02:05:32 AM · #18 |
No offense to Brad and Heida but when I think back to this challenge I think of Scalvert's and Bod's shots. Those left lasting impressions. :P
Message edited by author 2007-09-01 02:06:29.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2007 02:11:20 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by Atropos:
So the idea is to make it look like an impressionist painting? Because I was a bit confused there for a while... I thought we were supposed to use the same techniques as the painters but do it with photography, not just try to emulate the look of their paintings. That makes things a bit easier. |
No, photo impressionism has it's own definition.
It's a good opportunity for you to head to the library and read Patterson/Gallant: Photo Impressionism!
Quoted from the book:
"The depiction in photography of emotion or character by details intended ot achieve a vividness or effectiveness more by invoking subjective and sensory impressions than by re-creating an objective reality."
I interpret this to read that your photo should evoke the senses with a great sense of aesthetics rather than clinical reality. For example, a properly lit flower on a background is "reality". Look at the flower, what particular attribute(s) strikes you about it; how can you emphasize that in your photograph?
Message edited by author 2007-09-01 02:14:42. |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 05:39:32 PM · #20 |
So what is the conventional DPC wisdom on the use of filters? Advanced Editing says you CAN use filters, but it also says
...you may NOT use distortions to create new effects or radically alter objects.
Where is the line drawn? |
|
|
|
09/01/2007 06:06:37 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by alexzen:
So what is the conventional DPC wisdom on the use of filters? Advanced Editing says you CAN use filters, but it also says
...you may NOT use distortions to create new effects or radically alter objects.
Where is the line drawn? |
It's subjective so best to run your edit passed the SCs first to be safe. Another thing you can do is look for previous challenge entries that used your filter. A good place to find such entries is doing a photo search. Just search on challenge entries with just "description" checked and if the photographer has listed their editing steps it should pull up those entries. For example, doing a search on "Rough Pastels" which is the filter Brad used in his entry for Impressionism I his photo comes up.
Message edited by author 2007-09-01 19:46:58.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2007 07:53:42 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Also worth noting that the only image in the top 10 that wasn't 'all' impressionistic/ blurry won. |
Not true, 9th place was a pretty straight landscape shot with blurred waterfalls... All the rocks are sharp.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2007 08:15:48 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
No, photo impressionism has it's own definition.
It's a good opportunity for you to head to the library and read Patterson/Gallant: Photo Impressionism! |
It's a reason for me to go to the library, but not an opportunity =D The new one they're building a couple of blocks away isn't complete and my wife is working this weekend so I've gotta take my kids wherever I go.
I did notice the winning entry was one of the few that didn't look like it was an attempt to look like a painting... all of the other ones that did had me confused on the goal of this challenge. |
|
|
|
09/03/2007 05:49:00 PM · #24 |
| I have my entry ready. I'm excited and scared at the same time, because I like it that much! I think it fits the challenge beautifully, but that always gets me in trouble. |
|
|
|
09/05/2007 02:23:18 PM · #25 |
Here is a guy with some good impressionistic technique.
His name is Gary Black |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/23/2025 12:47:22 PM EDT.
