| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/29/2006 03:47:43 PM · #1 |
I took a couple of portraits at the wide end of my zoom (18mm) which I suppose is against the rules a bit since it distorts features. Also it was a bit intrustive for the model as the camera lense was about 6 inches from his face!
Anyway
One B&W one "Draganised" a bit , any comments or useful feedback
 
(deliberately posted so I'm not tempted to enter these into "off centre")
Steve |
|
|
|
01/29/2006 03:55:33 PM · #2 |
The monochrome work better for me, with an obvious 'connection' with the subject without the distraction of the multi-colour background.
I think the Wide Angle apporach achieves very interesting results - as you point out the subject can be under no illusions about the image being captured :-)
|
|
|
|
01/29/2006 07:10:32 PM · #3 |
I really like the Wide Angle approach, as it emphasises the subject and can give interesting perspective. Though understandably a little invasive for the subject.
I agree with front element, the monochrome one seems much more striking, as there is less backgroud distracting to the left of the subject. It's a strong photo.
|
|
|
|
01/29/2006 07:55:32 PM · #4 |
First thought............................
JOHNNY CASH!!!!!!
Message edited by author 2006-01-29 19:56:34.
|
|
|
|
01/29/2006 07:58:03 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Tallbloke:
I took a couple of portraits at the wide end of my zoom (18mm) which I suppose is against the rules a bit since it distorts features. Also it was a bit intrustive for the model as the camera lense was about 6 inches from his face!
Anyway
One B&W one "Draganised" a bit , any comments or useful feedback
(deliberately posted so I'm not tempted to enter these into "off centre")
Steve |
Hi Steve - interesting shots. Love the background. What do you mean by the term 'draganised'.
Nic.
Message edited by author 2006-01-29 19:59:23. |
|
|
|
01/29/2006 08:15:56 PM · #6 |
I can't make up my mind which one I prefer, but I think the wide angle approach works really well. The model seems to be looking straight at the viewer.
If they were mine, I would definitely have entered one in the challenge, but I guess it's too late for that now.
|
|
|
|
01/29/2006 08:27:22 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by manic35:
Hi Steve - interesting shots. Love the background. What do you mean by the term 'draganised'.
Nic. |
See This thread and many others for the explanation of grunge effect.
Dragainzer is the name of the photoshop action used by Andrej Dragan... |
|
|
|
01/29/2006 09:09:25 PM · #8 |
Thanks for the thread, srdanz. i've downloaded it and on my way to being a draganiser! Very exciting. I've done a couple of shots but i think i've got a result that is a bit dark. Takes a bit of practice? But great!I read in the other thread that these are all legal actions acording to advanced editing - is that true?
Thanks,
Nic. |
|
|
|
01/29/2006 09:13:43 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
Originally posted by manic35:
Hi Steve - interesting shots. Love the background. What do you mean by the term 'draganised'.
Nic. |
See This thread and many others for the explanation of grunge effect.
Dragainzer is the name of the photoshop action used by Andrej Dragan... |
NOnononono!
Andrej Dragan has a "style" that made him world-famous as a photographer. The Dragan photoshop actions (collectively, "draganizers") were developed by others to emulate this style.
R. |
|
|
|
01/30/2006 02:07:04 AM · #10 |
| I do apologize for the post. It did come out stupid sounding, now that I read it I cannot believe that I wrote it that way. Basically, I searched for the thread and tried to put a sentence around it. In retrospec, I should have just placed the link:-) |
|
|
|
01/30/2006 02:09:47 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Tallbloke:
...which I suppose is against the rules a bit since it distorts features. ...Steve |
Against what rules? I think I am lost.
Cool shots by the way.
|
|
|
|
01/30/2006 02:20:54 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
Originally posted by Tallbloke:
...which I suppose is against the rules a bit since it distorts features. ...Steve |
Against what rules? I think I am lost.
Cool shots by the way. |
I was lost on that comment too. If you have a lens, and you put it on your camera. The result of that photo, no matter how distored it is, is legal, since it was all done in camera.
IF you took a normal photo, and applied the effect in PS, then it's not legal, since it was not the original photo after editing.
But yeah, if the distortion was an effect of a lens on your camera, it's legal. |
|
|
|
01/30/2006 04:12:46 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by HBunch:
I was lost on that comment too. If you have a lens, and you put it on your camera. The result of that photo, no matter how distored it is, is legal, since it was all done in camera.
IF you took a normal photo, and applied the effect in PS, then it's not legal, since it was not the original photo after editing.
But yeah, if the distortion was an effect of a lens on your camera, it's legal. |
Not DPC rules, rules of taking portraits. I think that most portraits are shot with 50mm or 80mm+ lens. Wide angle can distort the features which is not what most people want from standard portraits.
|
|
|
|
01/30/2006 03:22:19 PM · #14 |
Thanks RichSeal
Yes, what I meant was "against the classic rules of portrait photography"
Steve |
|
|
|
01/30/2006 06:43:29 PM · #15 |
Again...what rules? :)
Don't break any of these "rules" everyone's work is the same and nothing "new" is ever done.
|
|
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: 06/28/2025 03:18:16 AM EDT.
