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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Image Grain
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 144, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/02/2005 11:48:31 PM · #51
My image grain was done the old fashion way as well. High ISO. I thought it would do better but oh well. I'm still proud of this shot :)

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/247337.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/247337.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
11/03/2005 01:18:42 AM · #52
I tackled the challenge with the intention to only use high ISO noise. My original entry would've been crucified so I pulled it for a color version.

The score for the color version was a shocker and I should've used the P&S.

Here's the original submission shot at ISO3200 with no pp'ed noise removal or addition. I have no idea how you 20D users got so much in camera grain.

bazz.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/31889/thumb/252873.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/31889/thumb/252873.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
11/03/2005 01:22:24 AM · #53
Originally posted by sir_bazz:


' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/31889/thumb/252873.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/31889/thumb/252873.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


I think I left as such during the challenge, but why would you ever want to muck this picture up with grain? It was a picture just taken during the wrong week. :) I loved it, but didn't think grain would anything to that innocent expression. You might as well ask Joey to grunge her...
11/03/2005 01:31:50 AM · #54
Originally posted by Marjo:

post editing is now totally accepted at dpc and the trend has officially shifted. Duh!

So? Post editing is part of photography and always been part of it. Witouth post-editing we're just copying nature (Unless the photographer originaly wanted that...). And more, if you're against photoshop, go buy yourself a Camera Obscura for God's sake.
11/03/2005 04:56:09 AM · #55
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248054.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248054.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

I shot at ISO 200, which did not give me hardly any grain and then post processed, which some comments on my photo thought also was not grainy enough. I also selected sepia to give it an antique feel. BTW, this is a candid, not a posed shot.
11/03/2005 05:32:41 AM · #56
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248422.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248422.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
This was shot with only my dining room lights no real setup. I usually get about 3 minutes after " Ok...someone has to give me a shot " Both of my daughters and wife will plead " not me ... I did it last time !!!"
One of them will finally concede, and like I said I will get about 3 minutes.

This shot was taken at iso 200 and then the grain was added in PS. I was very happy with the effect. I plan to do a series.
11/03/2005 07:31:55 AM · #57
Getting the story behind an image is so interesting and adds a new dimension. When I saw this entry I didn't quite connect with the 'Sad Eyes'. Now I know why. The look on her face shows some of the "Ok, but hurry up..." feeling. Also a bit of the "stare" (that's what we call it around here) when our 13 yr-old doesn't like what he just heard. ;^) Thanks for sharing!

Originally posted by Coley:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248422.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/248422.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
This was shot with only my dining room lights no real setup. I usually get about 3 minutes after " Ok...someone has to give me a shot " Both of my daughters and wife will plead " not me ... I did it last time !!!"
One of them will finally concede, and like I said I will get about 3 minutes.

This shot was taken at iso 200 and then the grain was added in PS. I was very happy with the effect. I plan to do a series.

11/03/2005 08:34:34 AM · #58
I think I shall also write something here :)
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/247981.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/247981.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
I am really happy to see my entry scored so high. It was shot at ISO 200, F4, 200mm. there was very little or no noise in the original. This wasn't shot for the challenge so I shot it at lowest noise I could get. Even if I was shooting for the challenge, I wouldn't attempt to add noise in the camera as my camera is not capable of getting the same grain as a film. Its digital and I don't like the noise it produces and I don't think its anyway close to the real film grain. so adding noise in photoshop is what I did for the challenge.

I have been experimenting with this for some time and photoshop does a good work at adding grain. Here are a few other examples I have tried. All of these shot at ISO 100 or 200 and then grain was added in photoshop.
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/225049.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/225049.jpg', '/') + 1) . '' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/246815.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/246815.jpg', '/') + 1) . '' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/238520.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/4226/thumb/238520.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
11/03/2005 08:53:32 AM · #59
Mine wasnt originally shot for the challenge, I am trying to stretch my artistic talents lately, and in this case I was trying to emulate the feeling of a 'still life' with an oil painting look. I was very happy with the result. Thanks to all who gave great comments and favorites, its turning into one of my personal favorites too.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/245659.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/245659.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 08:54:46.
11/03/2005 09:24:35 AM · #60
Originally posted by bobdaveant:

... I am trying to stretch my artistic talents lately...

Bob - You've stretched them quite well I would say! Left a comment.

Hope you don't mind me seguing...I was about to start a thread on how DPC has opened my eyes to some techniques I would taken much longer to find on my own - if ever. It involves grain amongst other things...bear with me. ;^)

At the VA State Fair I met skiprow. Watched him sling around his camera, dropping it at arms length into animal pens, etc... For fun, when I was shooting for 'Wide Angle' I tried some of this (I'm a viewfinder guy). Results were fun...then I tried tossing in a sepia tone, added some grain, and came up with this. (was too early for 'Image Grain' where it would've been better suited).

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/391/thumb/242603.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/391/thumb/242603.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

I had to laugh when I saw the 'Image Grain' challenge come up just after this. Wasn't sure I would try grain again after watching the score on the above image. Ended up with this anyway:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/246920.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/394/thumb/246920.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Long story short - I enjoyed the 'Image Grain' challenge. I've made 8x10's of both of the above images to share with my local photography club next week. Without DPC I doubt I would have gone down this path.

Thanks DPC (and all you happy members out there)! ;^)
11/03/2005 10:29:50 AM · #61
Originally posted by Ennil:

Originally posted by Marjo:

post editing is now totally accepted at dpc and the trend has officially shifted. Duh!

So? Post editing is part of photography and always been part of it. Witouth post-editing we're just copying nature (Unless the photographer originaly wanted that...). And more, if you're against photoshop, go buy yourself a Camera Obscura for God's sake.


Not nice.

Just an observation...we're not going there, again!
I'm finding this thread to be interesting as to how individuals approached and achieved their intended entries. Nothing more.
11/03/2005 10:39:35 AM · #62
Originally posted by Marjo:

Not nice.

How so? Debates are alway healthy. Plus I've got nothing against Camera Obscuras.
11/03/2005 10:46:33 AM · #63
Originally posted by Ennil:

Originally posted by Marjo:

Not nice.

How so? Debates are alway healthy. Plus I've got nothing against Camera Obscuras.

The flippant/sarcastic "for God's sake" tacked onto the end of your comment...is what I thought was not nice.

Yes, debates are healthy; this one's been beat to death. Editing or not-editing is each photographer's choice depending upon the rules and requirements.

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 10:48:10.
11/03/2005 01:54:42 PM · #64
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Oh, he's good at side-stepping... ;^)


So, how to evaluate a photo? Some things to consider...

A. Technical Quality
B. Visual Content/Composition
C. Subject
D. Creativity/Originality
E. Meaning (how about a little 'soul')

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 13:55:02.
11/03/2005 02:30:22 PM · #65
Originally posted by gaurawa:


I have been experimenting with this for some time and photoshop does a good work at adding grain. Here are a few other examples I have tried. All of these shot at ISO 100 or 200 and then grain was added in photoshop.


All of these are *very* nice! It looks like you have figured out how to get the grain at just the right amount, and look like it belongs. I use Paintshop Pro, and had a heck of a time getting anything that looked decent...still haven't figured out how to get the look you achieved.

Originally posted by glad2badad:


..I've made 8x10's of both of the above images to share with my local photography club next week...


How did they turn out at 8x10? One issue I had, is you couldn't see the grain very clearly when resized, but at larger sizes(zoomed in to 50-100%), it was ugly, overbearing, and unnatural. Tried uniform, random, gaussian, etc... small amounts, lots, reduced opacity, etc.. and couldn't get the look I was after. I just wondered what they looked like printed....especially at larger than 4x6.

11/03/2005 03:10:29 PM · #66
Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Oh, he's good at side-stepping... ;^)


So, how to evaluate a photo? Some things to consider...

A. Technical Quality
B. Visual Content/Composition
C. Subject
D. Creativity/Originality
E. Meaning (how about a little 'soul')


Which ribbon photo to start with....1,2,3?
11/03/2005 03:21:56 PM · #67
I'll be able to tell you in a few days once they come in. Just ordered them yesterday from DPCPrints. ;^)

Originally posted by tsheets:


Originally posted by glad2badad:


..I've made 8x10's of both of the above images to share with my local photography club next week...


How did they turn out at 8x10? One issue I had, is you couldn't see the grain very clearly when resized, but at larger sizes(zoomed in to 50-100%), it was ugly, overbearing, and unnatural. Tried uniform, random, gaussian, etc... small amounts, lots, reduced opacity, etc.. and couldn't get the look I was after. I just wondered what they looked like printed....especially at larger than 4x6.

11/03/2005 03:28:31 PM · #68
Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Oh, he's good at side-stepping... ;^)


So, how to evaluate a photo? Some things to consider...

A. Technical Quality
B. Visual Content/Composition
C. Subject
D. Creativity/Originality
E. Meaning (how about a little 'soul')


Which ribbon photo to start with....1,2,3?


1
11/03/2005 04:46:01 PM · #69
Originally posted by jhonan:

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Oh, he's good at side-stepping... ;^)


So, how to evaluate a photo? Some things to consider...

A. Technical Quality
B. Visual Content/Composition
C. Subject
D. Creativity/Originality
E. Meaning (how about a little 'soul')


Which ribbon photo to start with....1,2,3?


1


ok
11/04/2005 11:32:03 AM · #70
Originally posted by azoychka:


ok


Are you still writing?
11/04/2005 11:44:14 AM · #71
Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by azoychka:


ok


Are you still writing?


Hi mk

Actually I had it done last night and sadly I pushed post and nothing...I was informed that I had been logged out because of inactivity! So on reflection I have decided to do it again but a little differently this time. I will critique the first photo but again I would rather not. The first two have many flaws and I am questioning the point of analysing it. Really, this is a fun site with many friends, and that, may be more important than logical informed voting (evaluation) - (which in my mind is the worst type of assessment) of photos. Really, it is to learn and have fun and ribbons and results are secondary to that.

Message edited by author 2005-11-04 11:45:09.
11/04/2005 07:28:46 PM · #72
Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by keegbow:

Maybe you should read the challenge description more carefully. Nowhere does it state that the grain needed to produced from the camera settings and for what it's worth more skill was involved in the post production.

I rated these 10,6,7. The winner was obvious with the amount and style of grain creating the feel and mood of the image. The second was very good also but I just didn't like the central bright light, too much contrast for the dark image. The third was a great portriat with the grain adding a lot of emotion.


The description is irrelevant. Extreme processing alters and distorts what might have been good in the photos. They become caricatures of life. More Hollywood then reality. It is a taste but is not photographic skill. It is processing tricks. I like real life, not buildings that look ready to bounce all over the screen and tunnels that appear more from the Twilight Zone.


Once again you are wrong and misinformed. The challenge description is the how the voters make an assessment on whether the image is meeting the challenge or not which is the most important voting critera.

You have made your point several times that these winning images are not the type of images you like or would like to see winning competitions. That is fine for you to have that opinion but it is not what the site is about, your continued attack on images that used post processing which is allowed by the rules is getting a little boring for some.

Perhaps you may feel more comfortable in a more traditional or conservative photography web site.

One positive from hearing your outdated views is that these views always inspire me to keep on embracing change and to look forward to further change.

11/05/2005 03:35:08 PM · #73
Originally posted by keegbow:

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by keegbow:

Maybe you should read the challenge description more carefully. Nowhere does it state that the grain needed to produced from the camera settings and for what it's worth more skill was involved in the post production.

I rated these 10,6,7. The winner was obvious with the amount and style of grain creating the feel and mood of the image. The second was very good also but I just didn't like the central bright light, too much contrast for the dark image. The third was a great portriat with the grain adding a lot of emotion.


The description is irrelevant. Extreme processing alters and distorts what might have been good in the photos. They become caricatures of life. More Hollywood then reality. It is a taste but is not photographic skill. It is processing tricks. I like real life, not buildings that look ready to bounce all over the screen and tunnels that appear more from the Twilight Zone.


Once again you are wrong and misinformed. The challenge description is the how the voters make an assessment on whether the image is meeting the challenge or not which is the most important voting critera.

You have made your point several times that these winning images are not the type of images you like or would like to see winning competitions. That is fine for you to have that opinion but it is not what the site is about, your continued attack on images that used post processing which is allowed by the rules is getting a little boring for some.

Perhaps you may feel more comfortable in a more traditional or conservative photography web site.

One positive from hearing your outdated views is that these views always inspire me to keep on embracing change and to look forward to further change.


Ha ha ha very amusing.....
11/05/2005 04:10:19 PM · #74
Originally posted by azoychka:



Ha ha ha very amusing.....


' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/381/thumb/232328.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/381/thumb/232328.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Ha ha ha very amusing
11/05/2005 04:18:01 PM · #75
Ha ha of course.....
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/19/2021 09:37:17 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 09/19/2021 09:37:17 AM EDT.