Before and After ...
Sep 7, 2017 12:38:06 #
Since the Nashville Predators' Mike Fisher retired a couple of weeks back, I've had a number of fans ask me when I was going to do a digital painting of him. So two weeks ago I decided to start one of Mike and I have just now finished it. The original photo I worked from is of Radek Bonk, which I shot back during the 2007 season. Be sure you check out the download for all the detail. I hope you like it ...
Sep 7, 2017 12:50:25 #
Even seeing the before and after side by side, you still wouldn't realise there was a connection unless told.
Sep 7, 2017 16:06:51 #
R.G. wrote:
Even seeing the before and after side by side, you still wouldn't realise there was a connection unless told.
Thanks for taking a look, R.G.
Yeah, I know what you mean ... I have it printed out on archival matte at 24x19 and mounted on half-inch gatorboard it doesn't even remind me of the original and it looks awesome! ;-)
Sep 7, 2017 19:14:41 #
donolea wrote:
Since the Nashville Predators' Mike Fisher retired a couple of weeks back, I've had a number of fans ask me when I was going to do a digital painting of him. So two weeks ago I decided to start one of Mike and I have just now finished it. The original photo I worked from is of Radek Bonk, which I shot back during the 2007 season. Be sure you check out the download for all the detail. I hope you like it ...
Looks good small, looks great in download. I really love the intensity in both of their eyes. This is another success.
Erich
Sep 7, 2017 20:47:12 #
ebrunner wrote:
Looks good small, looks great in download. I really love the intensity in both of their eyes. This is another success.
Erich
Erich
I appreciate the kind words Erich, glad you like it.
Sep 8, 2017 06:25:09 #
Yes, good shots. I like the vignetting on the after shot.
Often in UHH comparisons are difficult because the photos are not side by side. To compare Before and After, generally the same shot, they should be made as one.
Open one of the shots and double the canvas width of one. Open the next Click Windows/vertical then the one not doubled is clicked on and the layer is duplicated. Then dragged over to the empty space on the doubled canvas, sized and positioned with the pick & move tool then merged/flattened. Now you have a side by side comparison.
Often in UHH comparisons are difficult because the photos are not side by side. To compare Before and After, generally the same shot, they should be made as one.
Open one of the shots and double the canvas width of one. Open the next Click Windows/vertical then the one not doubled is clicked on and the layer is duplicated. Then dragged over to the empty space on the doubled canvas, sized and positioned with the pick & move tool then merged/flattened. Now you have a side by side comparison.
Sep 8, 2017 08:41:40 #
Sep 8, 2017 11:05:05 #
I can appreciate the artistic talent you have shown with this rendition. Nicely done.
Shouldn't the eyes of the goalie be looking in the same direction of Mike's eyes?
Shouldn't the eyes of the goalie be looking in the same direction of Mike's eyes?
Sep 8, 2017 12:03:19 #
Sep 8, 2017 13:46:49 #
Often in UHH comparisons are difficult because the photos are not side by side. To compare Before and After, generally the same shot, they should be made as one.
Open one of the shots and double the canvas width of one. Open the next Click Windows/vertical then the one not doubled is clicked on and the layer is duplicated. Then dragged over to the empty space on the doubled canvas, sized and positioned with the pick & move tool then merged/flattened. Now you have a side by side comparison.[/quote]
Thanks for the advice, I'll keep it for future use. I agree side by side is much easier to compare. Thanks again.
Open one of the shots and double the canvas width of one. Open the next Click Windows/vertical then the one not doubled is clicked on and the layer is duplicated. Then dragged over to the empty space on the doubled canvas, sized and positioned with the pick & move tool then merged/flattened. Now you have a side by side comparison.[/quote]
Thanks for the advice, I'll keep it for future use. I agree side by side is much easier to compare. Thanks again.
Sep 8, 2017 21:36:16 #
SoHillGuy wrote:
I can appreciate the artistic talent you have shown with this rendition. Nicely done.
Shouldn't the eyes of the goalie be looking in the same direction of Mike's eyes?
Shouldn't the eyes of the goalie be looking in the same direction of Mike's eyes?
Thanks SoHillGuy for the kind word. As a former goalie and goalie coach, I can tell you not necessarily. Mike may be looking at a defenseman whose coming over to him since he appears to be wide open right at the crease. The goalie may be watching the puck ... or ... the goalie may be taking a quick glance at an open shooter anticipating a shot from him while Mike is following the puck.
Sep 8, 2017 21:38:49 #
Frank2013 wrote:
All I can say is "Outstanding Job" Don....
Thanks, I appreciate that Frank!
Sep 8, 2017 21:45:19 #
Donolea
Incredible artistic and technical accomplishment...wouldn't have thought it possible!
Dave
Incredible artistic and technical accomplishment...wouldn't have thought it possible!
Dave
Sep 8, 2017 21:51:52 #
donolea wrote:
Thanks SoHillGuy for the kind word. As a former goalie and goalie coach, I can tell you not necessarily. Mike may be looking at a defenseman whose coming over to him since he appears to be wide open right at the crease. The goalie may be watching the puck ... or ... the goalie may be taking a quick glance at an open shooter anticipating a shot from him while Mike is following the puck.
All very possible scenarios. I was playing off the vision of the two in the original photo, this is why I worded it as shouldn't he be looking in the same location as Mike. I understand it is your conception of the action and not mine.
Thanks for your response.
Sep 8, 2017 21:57:14 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.