DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> comments on these 2 photos??
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 11 of 11, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/18/2008 11:40:20 AM · #1
I took these photos of my daughter with my Kodak P&S about 2 years ago. I have some antique childrens dresses so I put her in one, put her on a bench and hung a background...etc... I used only flash from the p&s.

I converted them to sepia at the time but just went back and made some corrections and added the border..etc..

This first photo, I added some noise, added a torn edge border with speckles on the photo, then I blurred the edges of the border some.
[thumb]700305[/thumb]

The second photo, I duplicated the layer, the Gaussian blur with normal blend mode at 27% to give it that soft feel, then the same thing with the border.
[thumb]700304[/thumb]
 07/18/2008 11:42:00 AM · #2
I really like the vintage look. However, I think they are missing a bit of crispness.
 07/18/2008 12:11:51 PM · #3
I like the second one better that the first. It still has a soft feel, but the added noise in the first one seems a bit too much. Do you still have the original files? The sepia tone seems a bit pink, rather than a true sepia, and it's magnified by the white dress.

Just an opinion of course, and you know what they say about those! :-)
 07/18/2008 12:14:54 PM · #4
Originally posted by Jaker:
I like the second one better that the first. It still has a soft feel, but the added noise in the first one seems a bit too much. Do you still have the original files? The sepia tone seems a bit pink, rather than a true sepia, and it's magnified by the white dress.

Just an opinion of course, and you know what they say about those! :-)


the originals are sepia, I did an in camera sepia when i took them. I wish I would have known more about photography then!! LOL
 07/18/2008 12:21:10 PM · #5
Contrary to popular belief, grain or "noise" didn't really start making an appearance in photographs until the 1950's or so. Victorian photography had none...no grain at all, and the images tend to be super sharp unless there is blur from movement, or a large aperture was used resulting in a shallow depth of field. Also the tilt of the camera back could result in some interesting blur effects.

I know it may sound like I'm nit picking, but the borders have nothing to do with antique-ness either in my eyes. No photographs in my collection have such a border...nor are any of them actually "sepia" unless they are severely faded.

People today have this preconceived notion about how "antique" images look, and for the most part they are wrong. I don't know how accurate or authentic you are trying to be, so my apologies if I am taking this all so seriously...it's just a bit of a pet peeve, the whole Victorian photograph and grain thing.

The second image would be really nice if at least the face were sharper and the image went to the edge...no border unless a clean one. I love her little toes! You may also want to try just a warmer B&W tone instead of full on sepia?

Again, I apologize if you weren't looking for a brief history lesson. I have lots of baby images in my collection and if you'd like me to send or post some for you to look at, let me know.
 07/18/2008 12:39:24 PM · #6
Originally posted by RKT:
Contrary to popular belief, grain or "noise" didn't really start making an appearance in photographs until the 1950's or so. Victorian photography had none...no grain at all, and the images tend to be super sharp unless there is blur from movement, or a large aperture was used resulting in a shallow depth of field. Also the tilt of the camera back could result in some interesting blur effects.

I know it may sound like I'm nit picking, but the borders have nothing to do with antique-ness either in my eyes. No photographs in my collection have such a border...nor are any of them actually "sepia" unless they are severely faded.

People today have this preconceived notion about how "antique" images look, and for the most part they are wrong. I don't know how accurate or authentic you are trying to be, so my apologies if I am taking this all so seriously...it's just a bit of a pet peeve, the whole Victorian photograph and grain thing.

The second image would be really nice if at least the face were sharper and the image went to the edge...no border unless a clean one. I love her little toes! You may also want to try just a warmer B&W tone instead of full on sepia?

Again, I apologize if you weren't looking for a brief history lesson. I have lots of baby images in my collection and if you'd like me to send or post some for you to look at, let me know.


thanks! I actually didnt know that. I have no experience with antique photos!! and I would love to see some of your baby images.
 07/18/2008 12:43:02 PM · #7
Originally posted by gwe21:

thanks! I actually didnt know that. I have no experience with antique photos!! and I would love to see some of your baby images.


You're welcome Erica! I'll post some in this thread later today...so check back. I'll be sure to dig out some cute ones.
 07/18/2008 11:19:49 PM · #8
Ok...I finally scanned some images. The clarity is somewhat obscured by the textures of the paper picked up by the scanner. (Perhaps this is what people mistake for "grain'? ) The more sepia looking images are that way due to fading.





The dates range from the 1860's to approximately the early 1900s. The scans really don't do the originals justice, but are decent examples.

Message edited by author 2008-07-18 23:25:56.
 07/18/2008 11:49:49 PM · #9
At least 4 of those have a sepia appearance... Antique looking via a sepia effect doesn't appear to be all that off-base.

Message edited by author 2008-07-18 23:50:27.
 07/19/2008 11:54:15 AM · #10
Originally posted by violinist123:
At least 4 of those have a sepia appearance... Antique looking via a sepia effect doesn't appear to be all that off-base.


I agree...they do have a warmer tone. But you would have to notice they are not nearly as sepia as the two digital images in the initial post.

Grain or noise would never be a correct element to add to the process of faux antiquing a digital image unless going for a 1950's or later sort of look.

Just trying to share a bit of my knowledge is all...again, my apologies if I have taken this all to seriously. I have been collecting Victorian photography for over 20 years now and am fairly well read in photographic history. Believe me when I say there are very few examples in my hundreds of collected images that are true sepia or one that can be found with any sort of grain.
 07/19/2008 12:38:24 PM · #11
Originally posted by RKT:
Ok...I finally scanned some images. The clarity is somewhat obscured by the textures of the paper picked up by the scanner. (Perhaps this is what people mistake for "grain'? ) The more sepia looking images are that way due to fading.



The dates range from the 1860's to approximately the early 1900s. The scans really don't do the originals justice, but are decent examples.

I enjoyed looking at some of these. One comment - if you know the approx dates it would add to the viewing experience to have the date in the title or comments. :-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/07/2025 03:53:37 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 09/07/2025 03:53:37 PM EDT.