| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/17/2006 01:11:39 PM · #26 |
This whole thread sort of bugs me a little, because if ever there WAS a challenge that justified using retouching-for-smoothness, this one is it; that's a basic tool in the studio photographer's workbox, out in the real world. Portrait studios have been retouching images since time immemorial; it's what SELLS facripesake.
R.
|
|
|
|
04/17/2006 01:13:03 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This whole thread sort of bugs me a little, because if ever there WAS a challenge that justified using retouching-for-smoothness, this one is it; that's a basic tool in the studio photographer's workbox, out in the real world. Portrait studios have been retouching images since time immemorial; it's what SELLS facripesake.
R. |
AMEN!
|
|
|
|
04/17/2006 01:15:42 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This whole thread sort of bugs me a little, because if ever there WAS a challenge that justified using retouching-for-smoothness, this one is it; that's a basic tool in the studio photographer's workbox, out in the real world. Portrait studios have been retouching images since time immemorial; it's what SELLS facripesake.
R. |
Well, you may think about it as you like R. and I know it's a basic tool. But I don't think it should be used to over-process and make some barbies (sorry waz). |
|
|
|
04/17/2006 01:15:58 PM · #29 |
I'm a little bugged myself, but for slightly different reasons:
1 - conversations like this during voting sways voters
2 - there are only 2 people in this thread who have been in less than 15 challenges. there's nothing new going on. how can EVERYONE hate softened skin, and yet photo's with softened skin ALWAYS win?
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This whole thread sort of bugs me a little, because if ever there WAS a challenge that justified using retouching-for-smoothness, this one is it; that's a basic tool in the studio photographer's workbox, out in the real world. Portrait studios have been retouching images since time immemorial; it's what SELLS facripesake.
R. |
|
|
|
|
04/17/2006 01:16:49 PM · #30 |
Well I wasn't sure if I should enter the portrait challenge or not since I didn't have an attractive model or wrinkly old person that typically is the prerequisite.
I figured my voting potiental was limited just because of that but now I see this thread and I'm thinking I'm going to get screwed by the anti-smooth crowd! Double whammy I tell ya! Mind you I didn't use neatimage but rather noise ninja. Not that it matters since the skin texture is MOST DEFINITELY not smooth but you have to look at it for more than 1 second to notice and unfortunately do to the aforemention lack of an attractive model might be asking too much from finky voters. *sigh* Oh well bring on the 2s and 3s!
|
|
|
|
04/17/2006 01:26:20 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by hopper:
I'm a little bugged myself, but for slightly different reasons:
1 - conversations like this during voting sways voters |
I'm very sorry about that, that was NEVER my intention...
Originally posted by hopper:
2 - there are only 2 people in this thread who have been in less than 15 challenges. there's nothing new going on. how can EVERYONE hate softened skin, and yet photo's with softened skin ALWAYS win?
|
It was just something I noticed while voting. |
|
|
|
04/17/2006 02:01:11 PM · #32 |
Boy, sometimes you shoot yourself in the foot by responding to these types of threads, but what the hell, I have two feet.
To my point above (and not really to this challenge per se), some pictures are just over processed (IMO) - either too much NI (or equivalent tool), or over sharpened, or over dragonized, etcâ€Â¦ There are some people on this site who are true artists, who can create a work of art from the base of a plain picture. Then there are those who attempt to do the same, but miss the mark. There is NOTHING wrong with trying to post process like some of the DPC artists, as what better way to learn then to post to a challenge and get feedback! But, if you are going for a studio portrait (note: everyone has different ideas of what a "studio portrait" should look like) and your image looks like a plastic Barbie doll or the eyes look like shinny misplaced marbles ready to pop out of the socket, then 'you may have over-processed' (say it using your best Jeff Foxworthy "you may be a redneck" impersonation).
To Pedro's magazine point - completely agree, go with the client! If your client is Parenting magazine, then all your images of children will be VERY soft and saturated. I presented a few such images to parents I have taken pictures for and EVERY time they wondered why it was so out of focus. :-( For this challenge, the DPC voters are your client - good luck in figuring out what they like - I'm still trying. :-) |
|
|
|
04/17/2006 02:09:27 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This whole thread sort of bugs me a little, because if ever there WAS a challenge that justified using retouching-for-smoothness, this one is it; that's a basic tool in the studio photographer's workbox, out in the real world. Portrait studios have been retouching images since time immemorial; it's what SELLS facripesake.
R. |
I don't believe the problem people have is with the use of NI as much as its misuse....for lack of a better term.
I have seen images of people that are so overdone that I get the impression I am looking at a poor reproduction of something out of Madame Tousseau"s Wax Museum.
I may not necessarily know what is good, but I do know what I like and I vote accordingly.
Ray |
|
|
|
04/17/2006 03:13:55 PM · #34 |
I've been accused of overdoing it on web images (I don't even use NI), yet on the original fullsize images, you can clearly see skin pores and individual hairs, no smudging and blurs. Resizing for web can dramatically change a photo sometimes :)
Message edited by author 2006-04-17 15:22:43. |
|
|
|
04/17/2006 11:44:02 PM · #35 |
In my view, a good portrait interprets its subject. A portrait's aesthetics do not have to fall between those of Sears and Playboy. Despite the word 'studio' in the challenge description, whether something is a portrait is not defined by the type of light or the background used. If you want to get literal, one definition is 'a pictorial representation of a person usually showing the face' (merriam-webster).
So one might ask oneself, is it possible that the portrait photographer was going for a mood, seeking to convey the subject's personality/anima using their available tools? Relax, and see if you can decode their message instead of wishing the world to pander to the boring, boring standards.
|
|
|
|
04/17/2006 11:47:14 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by biteme:
Come on guys, a portrait shoud be sharp in the eyes, neat image could be used, but JUST a little bit... this is a bit of a dissapointment for me.. any other opinions? |
That's what YOU think a 'portrait' should be...good thing I didn't enter because I may have entered a portrait that didn't include a person or their eyes, and had some ... ready ... some ... NOISE! I can just imagine the threads people would start after that one.
-----
Seriously, come on folks...photography is a very personal thing -- obviously some of the photos you see, you're not going to like, but that doesn't mean you gotta start a thread telling everyone exactly what you think EVERYONE should have entered in the challenge...sheesh.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2006 12:04:06 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by shanksware:
based on the reactions in this thread, I'm guessing this shot from the last Color Portrait challenge in September would score a 5.5 today.
It was a 7.0 then.
Oh my, how things change. |
I seriously doubt that Nightshy intended this image to be photo realistic. In fact, she used NeatImage along with composition, framing and color to create the plastic Barbie doll, maniquin look that makes this image a 7. That is what makes it great.
What will garner low scores are images that look like they should be photo realistic but are overprocessed with noise reduction software. Those will be judged as technically poor, as they should be.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2006 12:23:51 AM · #38 |
Aeon begone! :)
 |
|
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: 08/29/2025 06:24:39 AM EDT.
