| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/19/2006 12:09:55 PM · #901 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Been questioning recently if I've improved much or just overprocess images now so thought I would share those two images. What is your honest opinion? |
I think the cactus is a toss-up -- just depends on if you like the multi-colored or all-orange type sky. The tree stump looks like a definite improvement to me. |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 12:26:35 PM · #902 |
 ...
Beautiful serene image. Like it a lot. Seems a little dark and flat to me and has a lot of green tones that can be brought out. So used curves and selective color adjustment layers to bring greens more and make the water "cooler" with added blue and Hue/Sat to saturate them more. Added dodge and burn on 50% greyscale layer to add depth and highlighting to the image.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 12:35:46 PM · #903 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Been questioning recently if I've improved much or just overprocess images now so thought I would share those two images. What is your honest opinion? |
I think the cactus is a toss-up -- just depends on if you like the multi-colored or all-orange type sky. The tree stump looks like a definite improvement to me. |
Funny you would mention the sky color on the cactus. In PS there is a selection called Image->Adjustments->Variations. In that you have a graphical display where you can add yellow by clicking on "more yellow", do it several times and you change the whole sky color. In an equivalent process with different software that is all the post processing I did to the original DPC submission. LOL. And here I thought I was so much more sophisticated now. :)
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:04:25 PM · #904 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
...
Beautiful serene image. Like it a lot. Seems a little dark and flat to me and has a lot of green tones that can be brought out. So used curves and selective color adjustment layers to bring greens more and make the water "cooler" with added blue and Hue/Sat to saturate them more. Added dodge and burn on 50% greyscale layer to add depth and highlighting to the image. |
Thanks Steve, I think I like everything but the blue. That looks a bit unnatural to me, maybe because I know it was a very overcast day, and water just doesn't look like that on rainy days.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:13:07 PM · #905 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Funny you would mention the sky color on the cactus. In PS there is a selection called Image->Adjustments->Variations. In that you have a graphical display where you can add yellow by clicking on "more yellow", do it several times and you change the whole sky color. In an equivalent process with different software that is all the post processing I did to the original DPC submission. LOL. And here I thought I was so much more sophisticated now. :) |
I started with PS before the Variations control came in, so I'm just in the habit of making my own by playing around with the various Curves controls ... check out the details of my recent Shadows entry for a good example: //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=346505 |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:26:49 PM · #906 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Hiya,
I saw the assignment for /w people, and it made me remember a shot I took at yellowstone.
Thought I might ask ya'll for any ideas or thoughts. There's already a gradient on the top (remove haze), adjusted levels and stuff. Not much else. |
That's a very nice shot. I've tried a variation that's faithful to your vision of it but has enhanced pop. I did contrast masking to bring up the dark areas a lot, then a second dark area contrast mask set to soft light and faded; that brought more contrast into the darks. I bumped yellow saturation and darkened yellow both, for more green without it being too bright. I dodged a little around the figure, and added vignetting. A little USM finished it off.
I also rotated .25 degrees ccw, it seemed to need that...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:45:18 PM · #907 |
The two B/W tree shots are exceptionally nice. The color shots strike me as sort of "average"; they are not without interest but nothing in them jumps up and tells me they are special, if you know what I mean? These color forest details are extraordinarily difficult to compose in such a way that they sing to you.
I have taken the horizontal tree shot and done some cloning on it; there are minor BG details that distract from the purity of the composition.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 03:00:48 PM · #908 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
 ... |
An almost subtle but fantastic change. Perfect example how minimizing image distractions can dramatically improve a composition. Nice improvement!
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 09:38:07 PM · #909 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
... |
An almost subtle but fantastic change. Perfect example how minimizing image distractions can dramatically improve a composition. Nice improvement! |
Absolutely. Attention to detail makes a world of difference in any kind of photography, and especially in landscape photography IMO.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2006 05:16:16 PM · #910 |
Another recent shot. Come on folks, let's keep this thread going!
|
|
|
|
06/23/2006 06:36:40 PM · #911 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Another recent shot. Come on folks, let's keep this thread going! |
Why isn't anyone taking advantage of the 800x800 allowance yet? Looks great justin. Maybe getting the sun behind the sticks would have been cooler though.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2006 06:44:29 PM · #912 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Why isn't anyone taking advantage of the 800x800 allowance yet? |
The reason I didn't on this shot was because it was quite a significant crop and I accidentally shot it at a high ISO - so I downsized it smaller so the effects of neatimage, etc. would be less noticable.
|
|
|
|
06/23/2006 07:03:28 PM · #913 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The color shots strike me as sort of "average"; they are not without interest but nothing in them jumps up and tells me they are special, if you know what I mean? These color forest details are extraordinarily difficult to compose in such a way that they sing to you. |
Is this one any better? Taken at the same shoot, just got around to editing it. I adjusted contrast with levels, boosted saturation quite a bit, and did quite a bit of dodging and burning on an overlay layer.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 12:50:00 AM · #914 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The color shots strike me as sort of "average"; they are not without interest but nothing in them jumps up and tells me they are special, if you know what I mean? These color forest details are extraordinarily difficult to compose in such a way that they sing to you. |
Is this one any better? Taken at the same shoot, just got around to editing it. I adjusted contrast with levels, boosted saturation quite a bit, and did quite a bit of dodging and burning on an overlay layer. |
It's perhaps "better" in that it's more striking, it has more "pop", but many (if not most) would find this green to be aggressively overprocessed and not pleasing. The issue here is not really your rendition of color; it's that the image itself seems more or less arbitrary; almost as if you'd shot a grid of the surrounding area and just happened to print this one. Nothing in the composition compels me. There's no key detail you're bringing out, for example, there's really no "subject", and if this is a "subjectless landscape", it lacks grace and flow, it's not taking us anywhere... I can't explain it any better than that.
These kinds of details are really, really difficult to do at a high level. Check out the work of Eliot Porter. I can't find any decent Porter resources online, but you can find his books in the big stores. He's extraordinary for this stuff. In the meanwhile, just get deeper and deeper into your subject, find pure, serene compositions...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 06:03:23 PM · #915 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The color shots strike me as sort of "average"; they are not without interest but nothing in them jumps up and tells me they are special, if you know what I mean? |
Is this one any better? Taken at the same shoot, just got around to editing it. I adjusted contrast with levels, boosted saturation quite a bit, and did quite a bit of dodging and burning on an overlay layer. |
Post processing is improved and I hate to agree with that guy, but Bear_Music is right about the lack of a main subject and focal point to this and the other color images. There is nothin special about their perspective either. That is partly why the B&Ws of the tree trunks are so much more appealing.
Btw, did you know that Bear_Music originally wanted to be called Bare_Music? Scary as that is, you can guess why.
But the name was already taken. Rumor has it from his neighbors that he lives up to that other name while out and about on Cape Cod. Gives new meaning to the term "blowing in the wind", doesn't it?
Message edited by author 2006-06-24 18:08:09.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:18:16 PM · #916 |
Huh? Tell you what; NAME one of these "neighbors" and perhaps some credence could be attached to your "rumors". Sheesh, what I have to put up with... These insinuations that I have a shaved pelt are very tiresome...
jejejeâ„¢
R.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:22:46 PM · #917 |
Thanks for your comments guys. I'm probably going to go back there in a few hours to shoot some more and I'll see what I can come up with. I'll be sure to concentrate on having a strong point of interest and/or subject and I'll try some different points of view as well. The hardest part about these "green" shots was that I had to set my tripod up in the middle of the stream while balancing on rocks, etc. It was hard to get it exactly how I wanted it.
Also, FWIW, I attempted to use the green areas of the moss and leaves to frame the scene - that's what I based my compositions off of. I was hoping the green areas themselves would hold enough interest, but I suppose that's too broad of "subject."
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:40:57 PM · #918 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Huh? Tell you what; NAME one of these "neighbors" and perhaps some credence could be attached to your "rumors". Sheesh, what I have to put up with... These insinuations that I have a shaved pelt are very tiresome... |
Hey... I used to be a newspaper columnist so you know I can't reveal sources... But you know if a guy way out in Phoenix, Arizona hears about it... welllll... there might be something to it. LOL!!!
Message edited by author 2006-06-24 19:41:18.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:41:46 PM · #919 |
Just posted this to the new photo thread but I thought I'd post it here for discussion too.
 |
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:47:02 PM · #920 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Thanks for your comments guys. I'm probably going to go back there in a few hours to shoot some more and I'll see what I can come up with. I'll be sure to concentrate on having a strong point of interest and/or subject and I'll try some different points of view as well. The hardest part about these "green" shots was that I had to set my tripod up in the middle of the stream while balancing on rocks, etc. It was hard to get it exactly how I wanted it.
Also, FWIW, I attempted to use the green areas of the moss and leaves to frame the scene - that's what I based my compositions off of. I was hoping the green areas themselves would hold enough interest, but I suppose that's too broad of "subject." |
Justin, look forward to what you come up with. I'm sure you will do well. You are a good photographer.
Remember this... If you don't get dirty, put yourself into a contorted position or put your camera at risk then it is probably not worth the effort anyway.
Btw, I'm gonna go out and try some motion blur shots for the upcoming DPC challenge and publication in a national magazine so don't let that influence what you do. LOL!!!!
Message edited by author 2006-06-24 19:49:19.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 07:56:17 PM · #921 |
Originally posted by pgatt:
Just posted this to the new photo thread but I thought I'd post it here for discussion too.
|
Ohhhhhhhhh... pretty image. Like those ocean motion shots. I tried to capture that when up in Oregon recently. Tried a lot. Never was able to do it, but did not use an ND or polarizer either. Yours is better. This is the best I could do:
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:22:18 PM · #922 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Hiya,
I saw the assignment for /w people, and it made me remember a shot I took at yellowstone.
Thought I might ask ya'll for any ideas or thoughts. There's already a gradient on the top (remove haze), adjusted levels and stuff. Not much else. |
Wish I had some time to spend in this thread! I did just scan to here backwards and thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.
Of the variations of this I've seen, I think this one is best. I like Robert's edits, but this one has a subtle beauty to it and doesn't need the "pop" IMHO. The stream calls attention to itself beautifully and the person works well too, even though a bit vertically centered.
|
|
|
|
06/24/2006 09:38:23 PM · #923 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Btw, did you know that Bear_Music originally wanted to be called Bare_Music? Scary as that is, you can guess why.
But the name was already taken. Rumor has it from his neighbors that he lives up to that other name while out and about on Cape Cod. Gives new meaning to the term "blowing in the wind", doesn't it? |
Bare bear? |
|
|
|
06/25/2006 02:50:59 AM · #924 |
I haven't been keeping up with the direction of the thread lately, but here's a landscape from an excursion with my new film camera on Thursday. Luckily I had my digital camera as well, because I only had BW film in the other one and wouldn't have been able to capture the colors in the sky. They weren't quite as bright as in the processed photo, but they were pretty bright. A pleasant change from the sunsets I usually see when I go up there for sure.
Any thoughts? |
|
|
|
06/26/2006 01:30:20 AM · #925 |
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
I haven't been keeping up with the direction of the thread lately, but here's a landscape from an excursion with my new film camera on Thursday. Luckily I had my digital camera as well, because I only had BW film in the other one and wouldn't have been able to capture the colors in the sky. They weren't quite as bright as in the processed photo, but they were pretty bright. A pleasant change from the sunsets I usually see when I go up there for sure.
Any thoughts? |
The image is nice, and I really like the smooth transition from blue-to-pink in the sky. However, I felt like the foreground was a bit dark and that the sky was too light up top. I had a quick go at it in GIMP to illustrate where I can see this photo going, in my mind:
To get more detail in the foreground I duplicated the layer, desaturated and inverted it, set it to overlay, and applied gaussian blur. Essentially this darkens the highlights and lightens the shadows. I reduced opacity to taste. Then I applied a dark-blue-to-transparent gradient up top to get a more pleasing sky color. I then applied a bit of gaussian blur to the sky to take care of the artifacts created from my editing. I also cropped a bit off the bottom to get a more pleasing composition (one which emphasizes the vast sky a bit more).
Message edited by author 2006-06-26 01:30:50.
|
|
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: 07/20/2025 05:10:16 PM EDT.
