How would you achieve a painterly effect here?

07/13/2006 10:35:55 PM · #1

I'd like to give this image a sort of "painterly" effect... how would you achieve that? Anyone care to show an example edit illustrating what you would do?

deapee

Kodak V803

07/13/2006 10:50:34 PM · #2

07/13/2006 11:01:13 PM · #3

Any other ideas?

Here are a couple of edits I have tried (before trying to figure out how to do a painterly effect):

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

07/13/2006 11:07:27 PM · #4

She's very beautiful. Love that dress!

Message edited by author 2006-07-13 23:08:29.

justin_hewlett

Canon EOS-1000D Rebel XS

07/13/2006 11:08:13 PM · #5

Originally posted by deapee:

Looks more "grunge" than "painterly," IMO.

wavelength

Nikon D300

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

07/13/2006 11:09:54 PM · #6

Originally posted by justin_hewlett:

Originally posted by deapee:

Looks more "grunge" than "painterly," IMO.

maybe it was left in the attic too long? Hey, to each his own.

rox_rox

Canon EOS-20D

07/13/2006 11:14:53 PM · #7

I was going for Chiarscuro; but I'm tired and got lazy.

07/13/2006 11:16:28 PM · #8

Originally posted by ursula:

Cool, we were on similar wavelengths here (see mine above yours). I like how you brought her face out more.

Originally posted by ursula:

She's very beautiful. Love that dress!

There's a story to that dress...

She had arranged to do the engagement pictures one day, and the bridals the next. When the day came to take the engagement pictures she told me she was going to have to postpone the bridals... the shop had apparently LOST her dress!

And if that weren't bad enough ... there we were, at a park, taking the engagement pictures ... when a bride in that SAME EXACT DRESS (how many other dresses have you seen with polka dots on it?!?) went walking by. She yelled out ... there goes my dress!

Oh, woops... now her fiancee knows what her dress looks like.

wavelength

Nikon D300

07/13/2006 11:18:29 PM · #9

Originally posted by dwterry:

Cool, we were on similar wavelengths

Duuude ::gasp:: get off me guys! ::gurgle::

07/13/2006 11:19:17 PM · #10

Originally posted by dwterry:

Originally posted by ursula:

Cool, we were on similar wavelengths here (see mine above yours). I like how you brought her face out more.

Originally posted by ursula:
She's very beautiful. Love that dress!

There's a story to that dress...

She had arranged to do the engagement pictures one day, and the bridals the next. When the day came to take the engagement pictures she told me she was going to have to postpone the bridals... the shop had apparently LOST her dress!

And if that weren't bad enough ... there we were, at a park, taking the engagement pictures ... when a bride in that SAME EXACT DRESS (how many other dresses have you seen with polka dots on it?!?) went walking by. She yelled out ... there goes my dress!

Oh, woops... now her fiancee knows what her dress looks like.

That's funny.

So, people actually have their wedding pictures made not on the day of their wedding? And their engagement pictures are made the day before the wedding pictures? That's a very short engagement :)

Some day I'd like to try making some wedding pictures, but not for now :)

deapee

Kodak V803

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

07/13/2006 11:21:13 PM · #11

my bad

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

07/13/2006 11:24:22 PM · #12

Of the "painterly" effects, I think Ursula did it the best, but I quite like the original the way it is, too.

Brielle

07/13/2006 11:26:29 PM · #13

Here's my attempt. Soft focus, and in filters, I used paint daubs, brush size 3 and sharpen 2.

Well for some reason I can't link right now... :o( If you click on my porfolio, its the only one in the "edits" folder.

Here it is:

Message edited by ursula - added little picture.

07/13/2006 11:28:39 PM · #14

Originally posted by ursula:

So, people actually have their wedding pictures made not on the day of their wedding? And their engagement pictures are made the day before the wedding pictures? That's a very short engagement :)

Actually, she's WAY AHEAD of the game. It seems pretty normal for my customers to do bridals only about 2 weeks before the wedding. That's cutting it awfully close. She is getting married on August 4th and we did the engagement pictures back in June. She was all set to do the bridals in June too. That would have been unheard of for me. Now were down to just a couple of weeks and things are back to normal. :-)

07/13/2006 11:29:32 PM · #15

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by dwterry:

Cool, we were on similar wavelengths

Duuude ::gasp:: get off me guys! ::gurgle::

LOL!!! You bad....

07/13/2006 11:30:01 PM · #16

Originally posted by deapee:

my bad

No ... wavelength bad. :-)

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

07/13/2006 11:30:50 PM · #17

Originally posted by dwterry:

Originally posted by ursula:
So, people actually have their wedding pictures made not on the day of their wedding? And their engagement pictures are made the day before the wedding pictures? That's a very short engagement :)

Actually, she's WAY AHEAD of the game. It seems pretty normal for my customers to do bridals only about 2 weeks before the wedding. That's cutting it awfully close. She is getting married on August 4th and we did the engagement pictures back in June. She was all set to do the bridals in June too. That would have been unheard of for me. Now were down to just a couple of weeks and things are back to normal. :-)

OK, I'm lost. The bridal pictures are done weeks and months ahead of the wedding? Do you make any pictures of the actual wedding?

moniepenny

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

07/13/2006 11:32:05 PM · #18

Just playing around. If you like it I will tell you what all I did to it. : D

07/13/2006 11:33:40 PM · #19

Originally posted by ursula:

OK, I'm lost. The bridal pictures are done weeks and months ahead of the wedding? Do you make any pictures of the actual wedding?

Some people call these "formals", others call them "pre-wedding shots". Usually we have a large picture of the bride (that's when I call it a bridal) displayed at the reception. If both the bride and groom are in the picture, then I would tend to call it formals (cuz bride-and-groomals sounds awfully funny!).

Anyway, it's just so that we have pictures already on display on the wedding day.

07/13/2006 11:36:01 PM · #20

Originally posted by dwterry:

Originally posted by ursula:
OK, I'm lost. The bridal pictures are done weeks and months ahead of the wedding? Do you make any pictures of the actual wedding?

Some people call these "formals", others call them "pre-wedding shots". Usually we have a large picture of the bride (that's when I call it a bridal) displayed at the reception. If both the bride and groom are in the picture, then I would tend to call it formals (cuz bride-and-groomals sounds awfully funny!).

Anyway, it's just so that we have pictures already on display on the wedding day.

Allright, thank you. I know nothing of the wedding business.

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

07/13/2006 11:37:10 PM · #21

So far ... none of the edits really look like they were "painted" rather than photographed. That's what I meant by looking for a painterly effect. I've seen it in other people's images here on DPC, even in some of the challenges. I've played around a lot in Photoshop and I'm just totally stumped as to how that is done.

And of the posted edits, I'm leaning more towards Ursula's but still wanting to see some kind of painterly effect. (or maybe I'm just crazy, huh?!?)

skewsme

Canon EOS-6D

07/13/2006 11:38:37 PM · #22

Really lovely picture, kind of a shame to paint it up. I liked what you did with the soft glow, dwterry. I also like how Ursula got rid of that light fixture to the left. I was trying to get a brush stroke look and lost some detail but it wouldn't be that bad when working on a larger file, and you could minimize/erase the distortion around her eyes, etc.

07/13/2006 11:42:51 PM · #23

These are examples of what I mean by formals... these were taken a couple of weeks before the wedding and then displayed at the reception:

07/13/2006 11:44:36 PM · #24

It's hard to do a "painterly" effect on a small file, in particular because the face gets too distorted, it almost disappears, the eyes end up looking empty.

She's so beautiful, it just doesn't feel right to make her face less expressive. I also really like that dress, the shine on the polka dots needs to stay, they make the whole picture look so happy.

I sort of wish the courtain on the doors were drawn completely rather than showing through a bit of the house beyond.

Why do you want to do a painterly effect here?