| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/05/2005 02:37:14 PM · #76 |
Just had a quick read through the second chapter. Regarding the compositing of a sharp, overexposed image and a blurred, overexposed image to give, as mentioned at one point, a "glow". Has anyone tried reproducing this effect solely in post processing? I took a shot at random and applied the Gothic Glow action and then the Ethereal Glow action.
Have I missed the point totally, or is this potentially an equally valid technique, given the latitudes of digital post-processing?
Maybe this is something to consider or something to put me right about.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2005 03:52:32 PM · #77 |
All my images in this collection were done that way. The layers are merged with multiply.
//www.dpchallenge.com/portfolio.php?USER_ID=7743&collection_id=3012
|
|
|
|
12/05/2005 04:07:31 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by AJAger:
Just had a quick read through the second chapter. Regarding the compositing of a sharp, overexposed image and a blurred, overexposed image to give, as mentioned at one point, a "glow". Has anyone tried reproducing this effect solely in post processing? I took a shot at random and applied the Gothic Glow action and then the Ethereal Glow action.
Have I missed the point totally, or is this potentially an equally valid technique, given the latitudes of digital post-processing?
Maybe this is something to consider or something to put me right about. |
I've done it both ways, and I think both are valid approaches. There are many different ways to blend the blurred glow layer (or layers) with the original, and you can get all sorts of interesting effects.
I think, and I'm not sure if it is my imagination or if it is real, but I think the images where the oof layer is produced in post-processing look different than those where the same layer is done in camera. Not much, but to my eyes there seems to be a couple differences: (1) in camera you get a slightly, sometimes just so slightly, different angle on the photo, more pronounced if you don't use a tripod to shoot the two images; (2) the blur is so much more even in post-processing than done in camera, and the glow seems more even also.
I should try one of these picts where two are made, one using one original and applying an effect to a layer, the other using two images (in focus, oof overexposed).
Of the couple examples in my blog, "the old bridge" was done digitally (one image, layers blurred and merged); "frost" was not, it is actually two separate images of the same scene, both overexposed, one in focus the second not.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2005 04:10:59 PM · #79 |
To be honest, I am a bit tired of the glow effect. It's been overused. It has its place, but not on every other picture for crying out loud!
I think it is interesting that in Patterson's book, many of his glow exaples include man-made objects, whereas his multiple exposures are for the most part found in nature images. I don't know why I think it's interesting, but it is.
|
|
|
|
01/19/2006 02:07:16 PM · #80 |
| Did we die, or just stall ? |
|
|
|
01/20/2006 02:39:23 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Did we die, or just stall ? |
No, we are on a break ;)
I just got busy myself. But I did try the multiple exposure stacking experiment again tonight, with the aid of a tutorial I found. And the results are more in line with what I was hoping for using the technique. Check out my blog for the results of my latest try.
I would be happy for the group to keep going, although for my own involvement, it will be on a very slow pace. I have such a backlog of images that I've never "finished" (the images I used tonight were from November 6th!). I took a zillion images in Zermatt, and I want to use what little time I have to process some of those.
Anyway, check out my blog for the my latest stacking trials.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 09:25:55 AM · #82 |
Ok, here's a long term assignment for us "slow folk": find two pictures in the book that move you. Then, try to reproduce them, or the technique. Let's see it!
It might be good to list them here first (by page), just for interest, discussion, and to convince us all there's still interest!
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 10:04:37 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I would be happy for the group to keep going, although for my own involvement, it will be on a very slow pace. I have such a backlog of images that I've never "finished" (the images I used tonight were from November 6th!). I took a zillion images in Zermatt, and I want to use what little time I have to process some of those.
Anyway, check out my blog for the my latest stacking trials. |
Bah, call that a backlog! I have 2000 pictures I took in Big Bend in November to look at, some time after I finish going through the 15Gb worth of images I took in Italy in September.
backlog...
I guess at least its still only images I took in 2005, so not yet that far behind.
Message edited by author 2006-01-20 10:05:05. |
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:01:34 PM · #84 |
Is it OK for those of us not in the group to add comments against blog entries? I've just checked out everyone's blogs and am particularly blown away by Ursula's work from the first study group and her mushroom image from the new group. It's stunning stuff and I can't help but thinking she should be marketing it professionally... Anyway, let me know if comments from outsiders would be welcome or not.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:05:28 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Is it OK for those of us not in the group to add comments against blog entries? I've just checked out everyone's blogs and am particularly blown away by Ursula's work from the first study group and her mushroom image from the new group. It's stunning stuff and I can't help but thinking she should be marketing it professionally... Anyway, let me know if comments from outsiders would be welcome or not. |
They are great, aren't they ?
Just don't comment on mine, I know you'd only be rude about those crappy attempts. |
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:06:10 PM · #86 |
Constructive comments are welcome from just about anyone, as far as I'm concerned and, yes, you're right about Ursula's stuff. It's enough to make you sick, isnt it? :)
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:09:14 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
They are great, aren't they ?
Just don't comment on mine, I know you'd only be rude about those crappy attempts. |
I don't recall ever being rude about any of your images. I may have stated honestly but politely that I didn't like one or other aspect but I hope I've never been rude.
Originally posted by AJAger:
Constructive comments are welcome from just about anyone, as far as I'm concerned and, yes, you're right about Ursula's stuff. It's enough to make you sick, isnt it? :) |
I'll definitely make an effort to comment any of yours if I have anything I think might be helpful in anyway!
Message edited by author 2006-01-20 15:09:29.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:11:46 PM · #88 |
I welcome constructive or even just encouraging comments from anyone as well. One of the things that actually discouraged me a bit about the previous group is that the number of comments have been on the sparse side! It made me wonder if the blog method was the best method here. (Though the group voted to go that way again!)
And what you folks don't know is that Ursula's maiden name is actually "Patterson", and she is Freeman's daughter and protege ;)
Message edited by author 2006-01-20 15:13:14.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:13:12 PM · #89 |
| If you could edit the first post to create a link to all the blogs I'll certainly make an effort to follow (and comment, only on those who want it) when I can. |
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:14:42 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
If you could edit the first post to create a link to all the blogs I'll certainly make an effort to follow (and comment, only on those who want it) when I can. |
Will try later, but most of us have links to the others on our blog. So find one, you should find them all! (And mines' in my sig line).
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:20:03 PM · #91 |
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:28:15 PM · #92 |
I'm SO GLAD this thread is alive again! I was quite sad, because I thought it had died out. YEAH!!!!
OK, back to work. I got to go get the book out again and see what else we're doing.
Neil, I like your idea (for a long term project for the group) to pick one or two images from the book and try to reproduce it (or the technique).
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 03:33:00 PM · #93 |
I am so glad that we are going to fire up again - inspiration, inspiration!
|
|
|
|
01/20/2006 11:36:18 PM · #94 |
So excited about this thread being alive again, that I posted 4 more pictures to my blog. Nothing new really, just 3 (digital) double exposures and one multi, all from images made in the last 10 days or so.
ursulas workshop
|
|
|
|
04/11/2006 04:26:38 PM · #95 |
*clear* bzzzzupt
*clear* bzzzzzuuupppt
beep
beep
? |
|
|
|
04/11/2006 04:29:40 PM · #96 |
Yeah, so how's it going, Gordon?
I haven't been posting anything. That doesn't mean I haven't been working on this, but just not in public.
|
|
|
|
04/11/2006 04:59:10 PM · #97 |
Ah, one of my fav threads resurrected...
Looking forward to seeing more of this stuff!
|
|
|
|
04/11/2006 05:05:52 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Yeah, so how's it going, Gordon?
|
Just moved house, new job, started training for another triathlon.
There's this heavy black thing with bits of glass sticking out the front in the corner of the room that I seem to remember using for something, but I can't remember what. |
|
|
|
04/11/2006 05:35:58 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by ursula:
Yeah, so how's it going, Gordon?
|
Just moved house, new job, started training for another triathlon.
There's this heavy black thing with bits of glass sticking out the front in the corner of the room that I seem to remember using for something, but I can't remember what. |
Well, congratulations! I hope you enjoy your new home and job.
The black thing is for keeping things inside, they kind of go flat on you, but you can keep them just the way you like them pretty much forever after that. You can also point it at unsuspecting people, who then promptly will start posing for you. |
|
|
|
04/11/2006 07:02:27 PM · #100 |
Congratulations Gordon.
Sorry for my general absence. Work is crazy now, but will start to lighten up in a week or so and then I'd be interested in reviving this and participating more!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 02:54:52 AM EDT.
