InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

After the recent discussion regarding 3D modeling using computer generated images I wondered how many of you are taking the images in this genre and altering them to the point where it's debatable whether the image is a photo or not. I see a good deal of this in the flower images in other parts of this forum. I'm not only interested in your general opinion of this, I'm wondering if you think it has a commercial appeal. Are people more likely to hang a nude image on the wall if it's less recognizable as a photo?

If so, would you be willing to upload some examples and discuss what programs you're using? I've seen some of FotoArtist's work in this regard, but not too much from others in this section. I dabble a bit, but mostly with a phone. When I'm killing time waiting somewhere, I might download one of my own images from our flickr account and play around with it using a phone editor then upload the results to save it.

In a more serious fashion in lightroom or photoshop I might do some monochrome conversions, play with contrast, saturation, color depth, etc to generate an image that is a serious departure from the original photo.

Anyone else?

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

I guess I should have uploaded something first. I think this was done with Prisma, a phone editor

(Download)

Robeng Loc: California

Hi InfiniteISO,

I do most of my shooting based on what my friends or models want. If a friends calls me and ask for sexy boudoir images for her boyfriend or hubby I think they are after the Playboy style of photography. Not so much the artsy post production shoots sometimes you see here. My images tend to be more towards the classic style of nudes. Occasionally I would experiment with light set ups and go for a high key or low key lighting (latest posting with Michelle).

Not very adventurist but it works for me.

Rob

buckwheat Loc: Clarkdale, AZ and Belen NM

Because my grandchildren are prudes, as are my neighbors, I don't hang nudes of any kind on my wall. BUT when I shoot with a model I generally go through to see what images are good and stand on their own. Often, I will try converting to monochrome, crop in many different ways and so forth. I then "play" with different software or filters to see if there is another, artistic way of doing the image. I have also saved a couple of mediocre images in post processing.

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

I play with photos using PaintShop Pro X9 strictly for my own use as computer wallpaper (I like to change weekly). Here is an example of one of my recent shots, three versions. But I think of these more as Fractal designs versus Photographs. Do like your shot and what you have done with it, maybe a tad darker would be a little better, kind of washed-out.

As for commercial application... discovered a long time ago give the customer what they want if they are willing to pay for it. Back in late 1960s, photographed two different people in coffins because the family did not have any photos of grandpa. Thought a little late but that is what they wanted, funeral home had no problems, pay was good. As for these my wife would probably let me hang <no pun intended> one of these over the bed versus the original, since she said I couldn't show anyone!

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

Here is one with maybe a little more Fractal look but not sure I consider this photography, definitely not good photography, even though a good photograph was used to make it. Only posting because you asked, not as representative of my photography work.

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

Stardust, thanks for your examples. I understand that these are experiments. There is certainly anonymity in your results. You have to look at them for a while to discern the subject matter. For me, to appreciate the underlying subject matter, you'd have to pull back the effect a bit.

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

You are absolutely right on pulling back the effect but then I would not have posted them, out of respect for the model. These were the only ones I could quickly find in the nude category - don't do much. Usually experiment with my travel photos, never to this degree.

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

You might point out to your lovely model that if she can be recognized by the sections of her form you've exposed, the train as it were, as already left the station.

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

This is a video frame grab using a waterproof jvc camcorder and lightroom. A "pieces and parts" type image that's like Stardust's to a fashion.

JVC Video Frame

(Download)

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

A couple more for what it's worth.

Max contrast B&W

(Download)

Art Filter

(Download)

Selective de-saturation and posterized

(Download)

Art Filter

(Download)

jonsommer Loc: Usually, somewhere on the U.S. west coast.

InfiniteISO, I haven’t tried this, but you have planted a seed and given me some ideas for things to try. So, thank you.

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

Yes and no - understand what you are saying but also she would not be embarrassed by these because they are more distorted art versus real-life photography. No face, enough body shape, identification tattoo, mole, scar, whatever to separate from a thousand others posted here. And, you are not helping my cause with the model. <smile>

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

Like #4 art filtered, and if you cropped #2 art filtered right above the breast, that is outstanding - worthy of being printed and framed. (Nothing against the breasts, but take them out and the EYES RULE!)