| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/02/2004 10:16:13 PM · #1 |
I had a question on how I did my profile pic and if it was a sketch from Britannica (David). So, I went through and redid the whole thing and set it up as a PS Action, if anyone else wants to play with it and suggest/implement improvements.
I have played with it on other shots besides portraits and had some interesting results, also.
Large photo with a frame I liked placed on it.
You should be able to right click this link and Save Linked File As or open this link and then Save As (just don't let anything be added after .atn). Have Fun!
//photos4aidan.com/html/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=5
Tracy
Message edited by author 2007-01-23 17:35:49.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:20:29 PM · #2 |
Tracy...that is beautiful. I love that effect. Very striking pose as well. Can't wait to try it out! Thanks!! :o)
|
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:24:18 PM · #3 |
Thanks Tracy, I was also impressed with the photo in our profile page. I downloaded the action and am now looking forward to having a go tonight when I get home. If I come up with any interesting results I'll post 'em.
Cheers.
Kieran
Typo.
Message edited by author 2004-08-02 22:25:14. |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:28:54 PM · #4 |
| That looks great. What's the oldest version of Photoshop that will work with? |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:31:46 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
That looks great. What's the oldest version of Photoshop that will work with? |
CS and 7, I would think, butI am not sure, I made it in CS, but it is mainly use of layers and levels, so would be good to know.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:33:31 PM · #6 |
| I'm mostly still using v5.0. Is there any way to print out the steps in the action so I can duplicate it manually? |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:34:46 PM · #7 |
I can sure give it a shot. I have CS log all the steps. So, will give it a shot in a sec. During the next American Chopper commercial. (C:
Message edited by author 2004-08-02 22:37:20. |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:37:18 PM · #8 |
Works in PS 6.0...although I don't know if I did it right as far as adjusting the opacity levels and such. But it's a neato effect! :o)
  2nd attempt...didn't adjust anything; left it as is in the action.
Message edited by author 2004-08-02 22:49:35.
|
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:38:18 PM · #9 |
| You may want to try turning off the Channel Mixer layer and see what it does for that pic. |
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:40:54 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
You may want to try turning off the Channel Mixer layer and see what it does for that pic. |
Stupid question #1...How do I do that?
|
|
|
|
08/02/2004 10:57:16 PM · #11 |
| Just have to click the "eyeball" off next to the one labeled as Channel Mixer. (C: |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 01:47:01 AM · #12 |
Here is the list...step by step....from the log (I did add in what I could to clarify as much as I can)
Edited-That was way too long.
Go here for an .rtf file
//www.photos4aidan.com/actions/p4ahighkey.rtf
Message edited by author 2004-08-03 01:50:51. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 01:59:21 AM · #13 |
Thanks for making it into an action -- makes it much easier to play with.
David
|
|
|
|
08/03/2004 02:19:50 AM · #14 |
| No problemo! Speeds it up for me, too! |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 06:08:39 AM · #15 |
Cool, after just a bit of fiddling I managed to come up with this:
Might be a little more contrasy than dacrazyrn intended but I rather like it. Please let me know what you think! :)
Message edited by author 2004-08-03 06:09:52. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 06:10:26 AM · #16 |
Very nice...you still have good contrast in yours. I couldn't figure out what to fiddle with most, so I stopped altogether! LOL
|
|
|
|
08/03/2004 09:15:40 AM · #17 |
Just to add my humble opinion to this thread, to me, "high key" does not mean "washed out".
"High" refers to the position on the tonal scale (which ranges from black to white), and "key" in this sense means "the predominant tone" (in regards to the tonal scale). So "high key" means getting the whitest continuous tone without letting that bright tone negatively affect the subject.
High key usually implies that the subject is predominantly light-colored, as well as the use of flat lighting to minimize shadows. Most high key pictures contain small areas of dark tones - for example in the iris of the eyes in a portrait. Without a small dark or black area, the high key effect makes the photo look washed out and insipid. High key tends to create a feeling of delicacy and lightness.
A photograph of a fair-skinned, blond-haired mother dressed in a white gown against a light background holding her baby is a good subject for a high-key picture.
This is an example of what I would consider a "high key" shot. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 09:37:51 AM · #18 |
Dacrazyrn - nice job, left comment.
My high-key approach has been different up to now, but I'm going to try something a bit softer to see how it goes.
Mine so far:
      
|
|
|
|
08/03/2004 10:59:44 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Just to add my humble opinion to this thread, to me, "high key" does not mean "washed out".
"High" refers to the position on the tonal scale (which ranges from black to white), and "key" in this sense means "the predominant tone" (in regards to the tonal scale). So "high key" means getting the whitest continuous tone without letting that bright tone negatively affect the subject.
High key usually implies that the subject is predominantly light-colored, as well as the use of flat lighting to minimize shadows. Most high key pictures contain small areas of dark tones - for example in the iris of the eyes in a portrait. Without a small dark or black area, the high key effect makes the photo look washed out and insipid. High key tends to create a feeling of delicacy and lightness.
A photograph of a fair-skinned, blond-haired mother dressed in a white gown against a light background holding her baby is a good subject for a high-key picture.
This is an example of what I would consider a "high key" shot. |
text
Thanks for the clarification! I had thought that "high key" referred to the studio key light (as opposed to the back or fill lights) being placed higher on the subject!
|
|
|
|
08/03/2004 12:12:41 PM · #20 |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 03:07:35 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Just to add my humble opinion to this thread, to me, "high key" does not mean "washed out".
"High" refers to the position on the tonal scale (which ranges from black to white), and "key" in this sense means "the predominant tone" (in regards to the tonal scale). So "high key" means getting the whitest continuous tone without letting that bright tone negatively affect the subject.
High key usually implies that the subject is predominantly light-colored, as well as the use of flat lighting to minimize shadows. Most high key pictures contain small areas of dark tones - for example in the iris of the eyes in a portrait. Without a small dark or black area, the high key effect makes the photo look washed out and insipid. High key tends to create a feeling of delicacy and lightness.
A photograph of a fair-skinned, blond-haired mother dressed in a white gown against a light background holding her baby is a good subject for a high-key picture.
This is an example of what I would consider a "high key" shot. |
Yea, doesn't the shot I posted fit? Or is it *too* dark? :-\
Message edited by author 2004-08-03 15:13:43. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 03:27:03 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by VisiBlanco:
Yea, doesn't the shot I posted fit? Or is it *too* dark? :-\ |
Of course you're free to call it "high key" if you want to; I'm sure there are some who would consider it such. But to me, it looks like a photo manipulated with "Levels", instead of being an actual high key photograph. Your face, for example, has no detail, and looks totally white and almost "plasticy". The dark hair and striped shirt also work against what typically defines "high key" to me: having the vast majority of the tones in the image above middle gray, including any shadows, while still maintaining detail even in the brightest area (except specular highlights, of course). But that's just my opinion... the trendy "fashion blowout" look (i.e., Madonna's American Life CD Cover or the Cradle 2 the Grave DVD Cover, which is what your picture reminds me of) is not what I would consider "true" high key photography...
Message edited by author 2004-08-03 15:33:53. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 03:35:40 PM · #23 |
| Got it, thanks for the clarification. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 03:53:35 PM · #24 |
Why we get such a range on what people consider what, and the best shots get 1's.
High key-A light image that is intentionally lacking in shadow detail.
I consider my example to be high key, as I consider the example EddyG posted to be also.
Message edited by author 2004-08-03 15:54:04. |
|
|
|
08/03/2004 10:19:12 PM · #25 |
Okay, you tempted me ... I wanna try out your high key action and see how I do. Tell me what you think of this image:
It was originally a color photograph. Her skin (although fair by any standard) was somewhat dark in the original. But this effect lightened up her skin and really made her eyes stand out.
What do you think?
|
|
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: 08/03/2025 05:12:46 AM EDT.
