Three images for your opinion
Sep 22, 2019 09:59:39 #
I really like this shot. I see endless possibilities for playing around with it. If your goal was to emphasis the front group, I think #1 is the best. I don't like #3 on download - some sort of solarization going on that would look freakish on any decent sized print.
If it was my image, I would try isolating the middle square with a simple crop. The crop would be full of action, color, texture and the dancer with the face forward would make a good focal point.
Alternatively, If I wanted to keep the full width, I would embrace the 'busy'. I'd try a 'transform' to reduce the way the grass wedges break up the action. Maybe, also try a path blur to emphasis the action just keeping the focal point 'face forward' dancer clear.
Have fun.
If it was my image, I would try isolating the middle square with a simple crop. The crop would be full of action, color, texture and the dancer with the face forward would make a good focal point.
Alternatively, If I wanted to keep the full width, I would embrace the 'busy'. I'd try a 'transform' to reduce the way the grass wedges break up the action. Maybe, also try a path blur to emphasis the action just keeping the focal point 'face forward' dancer clear.
Have fun.
Sep 22, 2019 10:42:48 #
To my eyes, the first image is clearer and sharper. I do see what you are trying to do in the others, but to my eyes and brain they don't work but serve to confuse the issue. There is so much going on in this shot that to add any PP effects is definitely overload, IMHO.
Sep 22, 2019 11:06:10 #
I think the first one does the best job of separating them, but it's a slight difference.
Sep 22, 2019 11:24:59 #
cahale
Loc: San Angelo, TX
Amen. Please restate or remove typos from next to last sentence. It definitely is not clear what you are saying/asking.
Sep 22, 2019 11:34:22 #
rborud wrote:
Hi All I have never done this before, but while working on a couple of PP techniques my curiosity of this group given choice and thoughts might be very helpful. The main goal if which servers better to separate the frontal dancers. So here they are, tear them apart!! RBorud
Whoa, lots of color, lots of definition, really, really busy....however the second two photos makes my eyes water so I'll go with the first one.
Sep 22, 2019 13:14:44 #
Los-Angeles-Shooter
Loc: Los Angeles
dancers wrote:
all I can say is "where are the Cowboys?"
Is that Elizabeth Warren toward the back?
Sep 22, 2019 13:30:05 #
They seem to look the same to me. Busy. I think you need to show the feel, since they are dancing.
Sep 22, 2019 13:44:28 #
Los-Angeles-Shooter wrote:
Is that Elizabeth Warren toward the back?
NO. These were REAL Indians. She only claimed Indian status to fraudulently get a job.
Dennis
Sep 22, 2019 14:40:20 #
Seems too busy to me. I think I would at least try to crop to keep just one or two front dancers with the dancers behind them and blur that. I guess you'd be discarding ½ - ⅔ of the photo. I know it's something you can't shoot over with a different f-stop, or get a shot that shows the feet of the front dancers.
Sep 22, 2019 14:43:13 #
rborud wrote:
Hi All I have never done this before, but while working on a couple of PP techniques my curiosity of this group given choice and thoughts might be very helpful. The main goal if which servers better to separate the frontal dancers. So here they are, tear them apart!! RBorud
I would have zoomed in on maybe the 2 dancers in front middle. Looks as the #3 has been sharpened.
Sep 22, 2019 15:27:38 #
There does not appear to be a central point of interest. The scene is very busy and difficult to determine exactly what your point of interest was.
Sep 22, 2019 15:27:54 #
I think everyone has hit the main issue of there simply being way too much info for the eye/brain to process in a usable manner.
#1 is obviously the only one with most everything in focus, and I guess that's the problem with separating the front dancers as everything competes for the eye equally. Essentially there is no depth of field. But, it's the only keeper in my opinion. At least you can continue to make other attempts toward your goal.
#3 is your most obvious attempt to do something that leaves the front dancers still in focus but almost obliterates the rest by turning them into bias relief or something similar. So, no good in my eyes.
#2 is better than #3 but still doesn't work for me.
I suppose what you're striving for is to reproduce what a shallower depth of field (larger lens opening) would have done. Monday morning quarterbacking is so easy...
ron
#1 is obviously the only one with most everything in focus, and I guess that's the problem with separating the front dancers as everything competes for the eye equally. Essentially there is no depth of field. But, it's the only keeper in my opinion. At least you can continue to make other attempts toward your goal.
#3 is your most obvious attempt to do something that leaves the front dancers still in focus but almost obliterates the rest by turning them into bias relief or something similar. So, no good in my eyes.
#2 is better than #3 but still doesn't work for me.
I suppose what you're striving for is to reproduce what a shallower depth of field (larger lens opening) would have done. Monday morning quarterbacking is so easy...
ron
Sep 22, 2019 15:33:26 #
I'm in the camp of those who noted the "business" of the scene, as well as noting anything significantly different among the photos presented.
--Bob
--Bob
Sep 22, 2019 17:17:56 #
nanaval wrote:
On looking at all the pictures I think that on the last one you have put a filter on it but left the 4 front dancers with out it. May be this was to separate them .The dancer in the right has the filter on one hand and some of the feathers. Maybe if you could isolate them and blur the background they would stand out more. At the moment they are very busy with all the colour... It must be hard to get dancers on their own with so many there...
I believe nanaval has zeroed in on the solution to your question. Blur the background with Photoshop.
The filter applied to parts of the bottom one is particularly unpleasing when viewed enlarged, and the middle one has had something applied overall that doesn't seem to help one group stand out from the rest.
I opened the top one in Photoshop, did a very rough selection of the two foremost dancers, inverted that selection, and applied a blur to the rest. Looked like what you might be wanting to do. It would be extremely tedious to do well, considering the amount of feather and bead detail, but with enough time one could even do several layers, with increasing amounts of blur farther back in the crowd.
That is an incredible image, there are worlds of possibilities there!
Marshall
Sep 22, 2019 17:44:49 #
Depends on your PP software. If Photoshop or Elements, duplicate layers. Separate out the dancers in the front. Dim the background layer (or vignette it).
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.