 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / October 2004[SI] "Black & White" is now on display
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/bw And the goat is all gone now. Do not adjust your monitor - it's supposed to look like that. - Al.  SignatureTo reply, insert dash in address to match domain below Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net Before y'all go wild on me, my shot is indeed the right entry. Just to be contrary, I decided not to just do a B&W photo. The idea is that it's the transition of the day from light to dark, plus it has some black and some white in it, if you look closely. (It's a beach on the north-east shore of L.Superior, facing south, at sunset). > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/bw Well, I didn't submit an entry for this one, & this B&W shot wouldn't qualify anyway, because it's Photoshopped, but I'd be most interested in peoples' opinions/criticism of it: <http://www.imagenoir.com/photos/CRW_4353-web.jpg> SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- > > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/bw > > Well, I didn't submit an entry for this one, & this B&W shot wouldn't > qualify anyway, because it's Photoshopped, but I'd be most interested in > peoples' opinions/criticism of it: > <http://www.imagenoir.com/photos/CRW_4353-web.jpg> I don't really think converting to B&W is egregious "Photoshopping." I think at least three entries were converted to grayscale in Photoshop for this mandate. It's a good portrait shot, but nothing extraordinary about it. Signaturehttp://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/ >> > http://www.pbase.com/shootin/bw >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >think at least three entries were converted to grayscale in Photoshop >for this mandate. No, I did a lot more than that. It started off as a fairly rough grab shot that I took while testing noise levels at different ISO settings, but I liked her expression & the composition of the shot enough that I thought it'd be worth trying to turn it into a nice portrait. After channel-mixing to monochrome, I reduced the shadow next to her nose (which was /very/ harsh), did some minor cosmetic work, then cloned everything to a new layer with a mask, & painted in a blend of that layer to soften & 'glow' the skin for that misty/romantic look. >It's a good portrait shot, but nothing extraordinary about it. If you saw the original shot, you might consider it a little more extraordinary, but I'm perfectly happy for it to be described as a 'good portrait'. I'll take it as a much higher compliment that you didn't spot how much editing it had. ;) SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- > If you saw the original shot, you might consider it a little more > extraordinary, but I'm perfectly happy for it to be described as a 'good > portrait'. I'll take it as a much higher compliment that you didn't spot > how much editing it had. ;) The editing is pretty subtle. I'd say you could still pass it through the SI "roolz" - it isn't like people didn't airbrush prints for that "misty" look. Signaturehttp://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/ >> If you saw the original shot, you might consider it a little more >> extraordinary, but I'm perfectly happy for it to be described as a 'good >> portrait'. I'll take it as a much higher compliment that you didn't spot >> how much editing it had. ;) > >The editing is pretty subtle. Thanks Brian. I was trying out some ideas for using PS to improve skin texture, without getting that horrible plastic look that's so common in manipulated portraits. The goal was to make the very sharp, harshly sidelit (flouro ambient on the right, & on-camera flash at left) grab shot look as though it was posed, & lit by a big softbox, & I think it was quite successful. > I'd say you could still pass it through >the SI "roolz" - it isn't like people didn't airbrush prints for that >"misty" look. Maybe, but I'd still feel like I was cheating, all the same. The final result is *very* different to the original. (I'd like to put the original up next to the final image to show you *how* different they are, but if Josie found out I'd made the original public, I might wake the next day minus some important body parts.) SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- > (I'd like to put the original up next to the final image to show you > *how* different they are, but if Josie found out I'd made the original > public, I might wake the next day minus some important body parts.) Women are vindictive like that. Signaturehttp://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/ >> (I'd like to put the original up next to the final image to show you >> *how* different they are, but if Josie found out I'd made the original >> public, I might wake the next day minus some important body parts.) > >Women are vindictive like that. Not to mention vicious. (Well, the fun ones are...) SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- >>>If you saw the original shot, you might consider it a little more >>>extraordinary, but I'm perfectly happy for it to be described as a 'good [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > shot look as though it was posed, & lit by a big softbox, & I think it > was quite successful. Very succesful. *However*! I myself would like to see a bit more definition on the forehead and under the right eye. ....a most attractive subject in any event. Which brings me to a question I posed in the PS group, how to gracefully reduce the reflection of shiny skin in a candid taken with too hot a flash, too late at night, but which is precious to the people who took it and sent it to me. I want to correct it and print it for them..... I'd prefer to not use Patch, clone or heal, and I've already blurred the skin (Gaussian) just right to get a 'younger softer look', but it's still very shiny in unwanted highlights. -- John McWilliams >> shot look as though it was posed, & lit by a big softbox, & I think it >> was quite successful. >> >Very succesful. Thanks! > *However*! I myself would like to see a bit more >definition on the forehead and under the right eye. Hm. I see what you mean. I was wanting a somewhat etherial look, but might have overdone it a little. I'll try brushing down the layer mask a little in that area & see if the shot still works for me. > ....a most >attractive subject in any event. Indeed. I'm a very lucky man. :) >Which brings me to a question I posed in the PS group, how to gracefully >reduce the reflection of shiny skin in a candid taken with too hot a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >skin (Gaussian) just right to get a 'younger softer look', but it's >still very shiny in unwanted highlights. Rule #1 for retouching in PS: *Always* do each separate bit of retouching on a new layer, *never* on the background image! (I fixed that overly-heavy shadow next to Josie's nose on it's own layer, so if I later decide I overdid it, all I have to do is dial down the opacity to lessen the effect. I can also dial it up to reduce the shadow eben further.) The best method to use depends a lot on how bad the hotspot is. If all the colour is still present, but there's just too much luma from the flash, a 'levels' adjustment layer, masked by the colour range of the hotspot will get you most of the way there. The trick to getting the cleanest fixup with the least twiddling is to *over-darken* the masked hotspot, then adjust the opacity of that layer to blend in the dark patch. If any of the colour channels are blown out, (especially green, which hold the most luma detail), it'll be harder work, because you'll need to replace the chroma as well as the luma in the hotspot. Anyway, I've just been reminded that I need to get out the door, so I'll leave it at that for now. :) SignatureW . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^--------------------------------------------------------------- << Snipped bits out >> >>Which brings me to a question I posed in the PS group, how to gracefully >>reduce the reflection of shiny skin in a candid taken with too hot a [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Anyway, I've just been reminded that I need to get out the door, so I'll > leave it at that for now. :) Thanks, only once have I overwritten the original such that I couldn't resurrect it. My biggest problem is creating too many files of the same subject, printing it, and then failing to accurately record which file I used, which adj. layers, and so on. I screwed up in a major way this week, and maybe it'll get me to change to an effective management tool. That I lost or misplaced (and then it may have been stolen) my iPod, and had to recreate adjustments on a number of panoramas added to my frenzy, and that printing hours are fixed and not that frequent.... Back to the subject..... the "digital pancake" I thought of indeed exists in a simple form: airbrush at very low density, sampling from nearby skin that isn't shiny. Worked a treat. But other adjustments such as you outline above, will be tried, and tia.... SignatureJohn McWilliams "Um, his vocabulary, like, uh, really, ah....... sucked." |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.