Author | Thread |
|
12/03/2005 02:50:57 AM · #1 |
What I did today...
OK, I cheated... But one out of four ain't too criminal...
R. |
|
|
12/03/2005 03:32:49 AM · #2 |
Im actually quite a fan of the natural phenomina, I love sunsets sunrises open fields lakes waterfalls, even a fluffy kitten at times, garnished with a garlic sauce and a side salad..
Great photography as always robot,
|
|
|
12/03/2005 03:37:37 AM · #3 |
|
|
12/03/2005 04:51:44 AM · #4 |
I liked this one the best of the four:)
|
|
|
12/03/2005 04:55:06 AM · #5 |
All of them are wonderful... including the sunset. |
|
|
12/03/2005 05:15:49 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by aguapreta:
I liked this one the best of the four:) |
Me too :-)
R. |
|
|
12/03/2005 05:55:59 AM · #7 |
How do you get that feeling of "distance" in your shots. They almost feel 3 dimensional?
--JR |
|
|
12/03/2005 06:17:38 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by jrjr: How do you get that feeling of "distance" in your shots. They almost feel 3 dimensional?
--JR |
Aside from any issues of using "good light" to promote depth, it's primarily a result of using hue/saturation to vary both the saturation and lightness/darkness of the different color channels. When you bump the saturation of, say, red, you can also darken (or lighten) it substantially and still have it show as red. It would be too garish if it were just saturated, but by saturating and darkening red and saturating and lightening yellow (one thing I did in the preceding picture) I can bring a much more strongly 3-dimensional feeling into the foreground of the image.
I also use color gradations to "contain" the image as needed; in the preceding shot, note that the sky is darkening perceptibly as it nears the top of the frame. This is done with a blue-to-transparent overlay, which is then faded to about 20% opacity (in this case) and it does a great job of creating an illusion of depth. I often do this with foregrounds as well, choosing the appropriate color, but in this case it was not neccessary, as the foreground was naturally in shadow.
Using the gradations this way, incidentally, is something I learned from Ansel.
Robt.
Here's the Coast Guard station in its unedited, original form and in the posted version:
This one I'm not that happy with yet, but you can see the principle of color contrast being put to work on a VERY flatly-lit scene; the light was coming from nearly straight behind me.
Message edited by author 2005-12-03 06:28:04. |
|
|
12/03/2005 06:54:39 AM · #9 |
Excellent as always!!
As for the blue overlay in the sky, do you sample a blue to use and do you use a gradient for it?
|
|
|
12/03/2005 06:55:47 AM · #10 |
I have a lot to learn; thanks for taking the time to explain. You have given me a lot of things to explore.
--JR |
|
|
12/03/2005 06:57:40 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Beach_mel: Excellent as always!!
As for the blue overlay in the sky, do you sample a blue to use and do you use a gradient for it? |
I use a blue-to-transparent gradient, yes. Normally the blue is selected from the pallette, as I usually am trying to make a darker blue than any that is already existing. I lay it in too dark then fade it to taste.
R. |
|
|
12/03/2005 07:50:17 AM · #12 |
The colors in all of these are beautiful, Robert. My favorite of the 4 is the 3rd one also. The water bringing your eyes into the photo and the reflections of the cloud really makes this one.
I know you have a reason for it and just curious what it is. Normally it's more interesting to not have the horizon so centered in the picture. In the first 3 you have done it this way. Is this to add to the feel of the depth? I'm curious if I am missing something that would add to cropping landscapes.
edited because I can't add or spell either one.
Message edited by author 2005-12-03 07:52:01. |
|
|
12/03/2005 10:42:34 AM · #13 |
Great processing, bear. I gotsa lotsta learn :( Thanks for the inspiration.
|
|
|
12/03/2005 03:19:34 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by BrenB: The colors in all of these are beautiful, Robert. My favorite of the 4 is the 3rd one also. The water bringing your eyes into the photo and the reflections of the cloud really makes this one.
I know you have a reason for it and just curious what it is. Normally it's more interesting to not have the horizon so centered in the picture. In the first 3 you have done it this way. Is this to add to the feel of the depth? I'm curious if I am missing something that would add to cropping landscapes. |
I don't believe in the rule of thirds for horizon lines in landscapes. Sometimes it works, of course, but many options exist. As you have noted, I tend to do a lot of landscapes with nearly-centered horizons. I am looking for a balance of sky and foreground a lot of the time, a sense of the sky and foreground BOTH receding to the horizon. Also I use a lot of water reflections, and much of the time that pretty well mandates a nearly-symmetrical composition.
I'm also fond of very low and very high horizons:
for me it just depends on the image. I regularly get voted down for not meeting the rule of thirds, but I don't pay any attention to that. I think most people are slaves to "rules" to the degree that it gets in the way of their personal development. Compositional "rules" are just guidelines that describe, after the fact as it were, classes of things that "work", but this doesn't mean a thing CAN'T work if it isn't in one of these classes.
Don't get me wrong; I'm all in favor of people LEARNING these rules (and how to apply them), but IMO you don't really develop as an artist until you internalize the rules and then just go with what your own, personal gut tells you :-)
Robt. |
|
|
12/03/2005 04:12:45 PM · #15 |
Thanks for the tip on using color gradations! I use gradients to control levels, but haven't messed with adding color that way. I will have to play some!
Can you be more specific on the method you use for "Aside from any issues of using "good light" to promote depth, it's primarily a result of using hue/saturation to vary both the saturation and lightness/darkness of the different color channels."
I can think of two or more different ways to do this, but I am curious how ***you*** do it (e.g., how many different layers you spread it across, one color at a time, etc).
Message edited by author 2005-12-03 16:15:28.
|
|
|
12/03/2005 04:48:55 PM · #16 |
I'm kind of curious about this as well. On occasion, I will lighten/darken a specific channel (or channels) in the H/S/L dialog, but often I find that it makes everything splotchy/posterized. As a result, I find that I don't do much with that. |
|
|
12/03/2005 10:45:46 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by nshapiro: Thanks for the tip on using color gradations! I use gradients to control levels, but haven't messed with adding color that way. I will have to play some!
Can you be more specific on the method you use for "Aside from any issues of using "good light" to promote depth, it's primarily a result of using hue/saturation to vary both the saturation and lightness/darkness of the different color channels."
I can think of two or more different ways to do this, but I am curious how ***you*** do it (e.g., how many different layers you spread it across, one color at a time, etc). |
A different hue/sat layer for each color channel, overcook each layer, and mix 'n match with layer opacity until it looks right.
R. |
|
|
12/04/2005 08:53:25 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by bear_music: Originally posted by BrenB: The colors in all of these are beautiful, Robert. My favorite of the 4 is the 3rd one also. The water bringing your eyes into the photo and the reflections of the cloud really makes this one.
I know you have a reason for it and just curious what it is. Normally it's more interesting to not have the horizon so centered in the picture. In the first 3 you have done it this way. Is this to add to the feel of the depth? I'm curious if I am missing something that would add to cropping landscapes. |
I don't believe in the rule of thirds for horizon lines in landscapes. Sometimes it works, of course, but many options exist. As you have noted, I tend to do a lot of landscapes with nearly-centered horizons. I am looking for a balance of sky and foreground a lot of the time, a sense of the sky and foreground BOTH receding to the horizon. Also I use a lot of water reflections, and much of the time that pretty well mandates a nearly-symmetrical composition.
I'm also fond of very low and very high horizons:
for me it just depends on the image. I regularly get voted down for not meeting the rule of thirds, but I don't pay any attention to that. I think most people are slaves to "rules" to the degree that it gets in the way of their personal development. Compositional "rules" are just guidelines that describe, after the fact as it were, classes of things that "work", but this doesn't mean a thing CAN'T work if it isn't in one of these classes.
Don't get me wrong; I'm all in favor of people LEARNING these rules (and how to apply them), but IMO you don't really develop as an artist until you internalize the rules and then just go with what your own, personal gut tells you :-)
Robt. |
Thanks for the explanation Robert. I agree that in some cases the centered horizon works very well. The reason I noticed and even asked about it is because there were 3 of 4 done this way. I don't do many landscapes but have noticed that those with water reflections can work very well centered. |
|
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: 09/21/2025 07:52:34 PM EDT.