Exploring non-literal landscapes via the digital darkroom. Discuss and share your photos!
Jan 11, 2019 10:27:52 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
The intent of the thread is opposite your contention that only "bad" photos should be heavily processed. Hopefully, this will be made clearer if there is sufficient interest from others who enjoy the creativity of the digital darkroom.
Do you like your Aurora result? Or was it a one-off you hope never to have to repeat?
Do you like your Aurora result? Or was it a one-off you hope never to have to repeat?
I admire and respect the skill of photogs who create different-but-excellent images in Post. I really didn't intend to imply that I feel that only "bad photos" should be heavily processed. However, as an aged former slide film guy, I try to get the image just how I want it SOOC. I know this approach is not for everyone, nor do I advocate it for anyone but me.
That said, at my age the chances of returning to Maligne Lake are dwindling. Too many other places to go to. So I really wanted a "good shot" of Spirit Island and cursed the photography gods (St. Paul called them Demons of the Air) for making it so miserable on my one chance.
And, yeah. I sure do like what Aurora (with a little help from NX Capture) did. However, I do hope that I don't "screw-up" any more once-in-a-lifetime images.
Jan 11, 2019 10:56:13 #
cameraf4 wrote:
Hmmm. This feels weird. As a rule I do not "heavily process" my images. If they are "that bad" I usually toss them. However on a miserably rainy day in the Canadian Rockies I saw this scene and, yeah, I rushed it. Before giving up on it, I thought I would give Aurora a try.
Is this what you had in mind, Linda?
Is this what you had in mind, Linda?
I understand your dilemma very well, having been to Malign Lake in the same kind of weather/light. And if you were on the same conveyance I was, they tell you, "go relax and enjoy the view, take as many pictures as you like, and be back on the boat in 10 minutes". Five minutes is already lost to trying to get past the other folks who are posing for selfies, so pure desperation sets in quickly.
Aurora is as good an HDR program as you can get so you may have maxed out what you can do with the capture, and you've definitely achieved a more pleasing result. If you haven't yet tried to develop it three ways and blend the 3 individual files (pseudo HDR), you might give that a try. If you still aren't satisfied, the next step would be (gulp) replacing the sky. If you go that route, be sure to work carefully with the lighting and color controls, to make the sky match the rest of the scene. I would not try to replace this sky with a spectacular sunset cloud scene, but moreso with a fairly blandly toned sky but with more cloud structure. You might have such a thing in your other shots from Malign.
Kudos to you for NOT tossing a once-in-a-lifetime memory shot. Never throw away pixels you may want later! We aren't perfect, we all make mistakes, and the tools exist that can help us make the most of them anyway.
Jan 11, 2019 10:58:47 #
Anvil wrote:
I did this one almost two years ago. I was learni... (show quote)
The kitchen sink can be your friend!
What you've shared is exactly what I had in mind, an image whose story was switched and the image made to fit. The image is yours, the thoughts you shared were yours, so it is very fitting that you used your skills and your software tools to create the story you thought up. Thank you for sharing!
Jan 11, 2019 11:10:22 #
dsmeltz wrote:
Included in the welcome doc is this sentence, "Discussion threads and tutorials are welcome."My view is that his thread is really looking at how various PP techniques are applied to landscape. If the focus was on a single technique, I might agree. But the conversation really seems landscape oriented to me.
If you're following, you will already note how much more articulate Minnie is than I
If there is minimal interest in stylized "non-literal" landscapes, that's fine. But she and I hoped to share our joy and stimulate interest for those who may not have yet explored this side of photography.Jan 11, 2019 11:12:39 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Included in the welcome doc is this sentence, "Discussion threads and tutorials are welcome."
If you're following, you will already note how much more articulate Minnie is than I If there is minimal interest in stylized "non-literal" landscapes, that's fine. But she and I hoped to share our joy and stimulate interest for those who may not have yet explored this side of photography.
If you're following, you will already note how much more articulate Minnie is than I
If there is minimal interest in stylized "non-literal" landscapes, that's fine. But she and I hoped to share our joy and stimulate interest for those who may not have yet explored this side of photography.It is certainly welcomed by me! While I have yet to really get into landscapes myself, it something I want to do. What I am learning here will be of great value.
Jan 11, 2019 11:17:39 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Thanks for your engaging photo, Karin. Can you explain what the effect did specifically, such as color, focus etc? And is "SPE" PS Elements? I'm having a slow brain morning 
The effect adds color and darkens and image. SPE is Smart Photo Editor.
Jan 11, 2019 11:20:42 #
minniev wrote:
I don’t know how this image started out so I’m not sure how different it is from your original, but you’ve accomplished a very pleasing and delicate look that reminds me of Japanese photographs and cherry blossom season.
Thanks minniev.
Jan 11, 2019 11:37:45 #
Cany143
Loc: SE Utah
Linda From Maine wrote:
Please share one of your favorite "heavily processed" landscapes and talk a bit about your vision and how you created the result....
Attached are three images. The first is the untouched (other than downsizing and converting to .jpg) raw image, the others are iterations of the first. It is not necessarily my favorite, per se, but others that might've 'qualified' were not landscapes so....
I have little idea what I may have done that resulted in the manipulated versions at this point since they were done several years ago, and I don't record steps or processes. What I do recall, however, is that from inception, my intent was to abstract the scene into something that retained some small amount of 'reality' while pursuing a 'vision of what my mind had seen, during and after the fact.'
One of the things that baffles me entirely is the contention that painters should not emulate photographers and photographs should not emulate paintings. What is gained by leaving tools --or concepts-- unused?
Jan 11, 2019 12:09:58 #
Cany143 wrote:
I so greatly admire the true artists of UHH who can use light and texture and color so seemingly effortlessly as you do. Thanks so much for supporting the thread, Jim!One of the things that baffles me entirely is the contention that painters should not emulate photographers and photographs should not emulate paintings. What is gained by leaving tools --or concepts-- unused?
Re your quoted snip, those "discussions" rage on in main forum nearly weekly. There's one active right now, in fact
Jan 11, 2019 12:12:14 #
Cany143 wrote:
Attached are three images. The first is the untou... (show quote)
You bring up an important point: purpose. While random play with software can be a fun way to while away a rainy day, the keepers that result from this are usually those where we started with some PURPOSE in mind, and pursued ways to reach that purpose. Which you did, in your final result.
I share your bafflement: for me, camera/paint/canvas/sketchpad/computer are all just tools. We buy them and we choose how to use them. We are all free to create what we will. At this point in my journey, I know how to capture photos. When I fail, it is because I was careless or foolish, not because I lacked basic knowledge. So most of my learning effort goes into the art side: learning software, art theory, color, even painting (which definitely helps in using PS or similar)
Jan 11, 2019 12:17:42 #
Cany143
Loc: SE Utah
Linda From Maine wrote:
Re your quoted snip, those "discussions" rage on....
Yes, I've noticed. They basically enrage me. To lessen the effects of that, I go out somewhere with a camera, then return home and process the results. "Emotion reflected in tranquility...." - Wm Wordsworth
Jan 11, 2019 12:32:35 #
Jan 11, 2019 12:34:16 #
John from gpwmi wrote:
Appreciate your interest. Feel free to ask questions; we're all friends here I'm learning from this thread. Thanks to all who contributed.
Jan 11, 2019 12:35:06 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
#1 - two textures + PS Elements "bas relief" in soft light blend mode at 65% opacity. I liked the contrast of red and blue and felt the scene deserving of a change in seasons
Changing seasons, changing time of day, changing atmospherics, are all things we can do if we choose.
Digital allows us that luxury without causing any damage to the original file, which we can go back to and develop in a dozen different ways, or cut parts out of to use in other creations.
Using photography in artistic creations of one's own is neither better nor worse than shooting a beautiful scene well and presenting it that way. It is simply a different way to use the tools we have.
Jan 11, 2019 12:49:55 #
Here is a landscape that I knew when I photographed it exactly what I wanted to do first. I've since done it up several different ways, some of which I like as well, but this was the envisioned "non-literal" that I saw in my head as soon as I spotted this tree. This is less extreme in it's changes than the first I posted or the one I'll post next.
The tree, somewhere in Ontario, was wonderful, the surroundings less so. It was a hazy late afternoon in fall, with a buttermilk colored sky and no visible clouds. I wanted something bright, that was all about the yellows. So I made multiple layer groups in PS - one with an Orton Effect, one with increased contrast, clarity and sharpening for detail, one with Topaz Simplify to do just that - simplify things, one with a soft texture. I blended these, varied their opacity, masked parts in or out, and eventually got what I was hoping for.
The tree, somewhere in Ontario, was wonderful, the surroundings less so. It was a hazy late afternoon in fall, with a buttermilk colored sky and no visible clouds. I wanted something bright, that was all about the yellows. So I made multiple layer groups in PS - one with an Orton Effect, one with increased contrast, clarity and sharpening for detail, one with Topaz Simplify to do just that - simplify things, one with a soft texture. I blended these, varied their opacity, masked parts in or out, and eventually got what I was hoping for.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.