is the background too busy?
Jul 19, 2012 11:27:04 #
snails_pace wrote:
Would it be OK if I worked with the first photo some?
Of course!
Sorry for the delay in responding.
I've been a little busy lately.
Would you like me to "store original"?
Jul 19, 2012 11:29:22 #
snails_pace wrote:
With the original poster's permission, I'd like to replace the background of the first picture with one that is blurred. He may like the edit or he may hate it .... but at least he can make a direct comparison and decide for himself.
My own opinion is ... yes ... the background is too busy and the great character of the subjects is being lost.
My own opinion is ... yes ... the background is too busy and the great character of the subjects is being lost.
Of course you have my permission, Snails Pace
Jul 19, 2012 11:34:29 #
Coker wrote:
There are a few points of interest I have discovered as a photographer. 1) Your family and friends are your worst critics! Why? Because they love every photo you show them. They don't get it. 2) I have never shown a photo to a pro that did not find something wrong with my work. 3) You are a whole lot better then you think.. smile
Never thought about it that way, but you are correct!
1) Yes, they always love them and I find something wrong and TRY to fix it.
2) That's ok, because I want to get better and I WANT them to tell me what I did wrong, or how to improve
3)Ocassionally I take a shot that I really like...until I start to really look at it and find SOMETHING that I didn't notice.
I see that you're from Havana...I grew up in Peoria....haven't been back for a LONG time, though.
Jul 19, 2012 15:05:16 #
snails_pace
Loc: Utah
Just wanted to make sure you didn't mind my working with your photo .... it is yours. I'm new to the forum and some people don't even want any pic posted on their topic.
I used on-One's perfect mask to remove the background and put in a new one. I did a Gaussian blur on the new one. You can judge for yourself whether or not it is an improvement.
Just seemed more practical than theoretical discussions of how a blurred background might help, what Ansel Adams would have done, religions of blurred backgrounds etc etc.
In my opinion, I just loved the result as your daughter and grandfather were seperated from the backgound and became the focus of the picture. It's a nice photo.
Well, your mileage may vary and you can decide for yourself if you think a less busy background improves the picture.
Also ... not everyone is into the photoshop editing thing, but there are ways to improve a picture if the background isn't what you wanted.
I like to photo. birds and esp. birds in flight. With the limited time I have to be outside, I've "saved" many pictures by redoing the background. A Wacom tablet is a huge help.
I used on-One's perfect mask to remove the background and put in a new one. I did a Gaussian blur on the new one. You can judge for yourself whether or not it is an improvement.
Just seemed more practical than theoretical discussions of how a blurred background might help, what Ansel Adams would have done, religions of blurred backgrounds etc etc.
In my opinion, I just loved the result as your daughter and grandfather were seperated from the backgound and became the focus of the picture. It's a nice photo.
Well, your mileage may vary and you can decide for yourself if you think a less busy background improves the picture.
Also ... not everyone is into the photoshop editing thing, but there are ways to improve a picture if the background isn't what you wanted.
I like to photo. birds and esp. birds in flight. With the limited time I have to be outside, I've "saved" many pictures by redoing the background. A Wacom tablet is a huge help.
Jul 19, 2012 19:15:41 #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Depth of field is often wrongly referred to as Bokeh.
http://mansurovs.com/what-is-bokeh
Leicaflex wrote:
To The effect blurring the background
is created by the lens, (Depth of Field) in photography it is refereed to as The Boken.
is created by the lens, (Depth of Field) in photography it is refereed to as The Boken.
Depth of field is often wrongly referred to as Bokeh.
http://mansurovs.com/what-is-bokeh
Thank you for explaining that, GoofieNewfie. (New one to me!) For a while there I thought those kids had highjacked depth of field.
Jul 19, 2012 21:30:49 #
Shakey wrote:
Thank you for explaining that, GoofieNewfie. (New one to me!) For a while there I thought those kids had highjacked depth of field.
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Depth of field is often wrongly referred to as Bokeh.
http://mansurovs.com/what-is-bokeh
Leicaflex wrote:
To The effect blurring the background
is created by the lens, (Depth of Field) in photography it is refereed to as The Boken.
is created by the lens, (Depth of Field) in photography it is refereed to as The Boken.
Depth of field is often wrongly referred to as Bokeh.
http://mansurovs.com/what-is-bokeh
Thank you for explaining that, GoofieNewfie. (New one to me!) For a while there I thought those kids had highjacked depth of field.
Nope, I think they just want to use a (new to them) term to make them feel cool.
Oct 14, 2012 19:06:07 #
Oct 15, 2012 03:18:34 #
Without a doubt, you have my reinforcing vote that these are crowd pleasing family pictures. Since you would like to take the same images into photography, you appealed to the nerds and I think garnered some good responses. We also see a couple of different visions of how the background can be improved.
But what I got out of this is that not all background trees are equal. (surely this extends to all other backgrounds as well but I find interest in the trees, atm).
Today I was shooting an object that had a US hwy as a background, from that side anyway. But I just squatted til my background horizon only included pine trees. They didn't distract because the needles are so small they already carry a blur at such distances. Even relatively close, pine gives you a subtle background that is easily obscured if necessary. But when you go shooting in front of a fig tree
(?) you have a much larger repeat pattern such that the leaves here compete as individual objects for attention. I will be watching this factor going forward as I have a new fig tree and I look forward to its fruit, if not its background.
I haven't quite figured out Lens Cap's trick and I wished he would share more, but I do like the work.
I am not looking to lecture, but to acknowledge an insight I garnered due to this conversation. But now it seems obvious and I even feel a little silly, but that's discovery for ya!
But what I got out of this is that not all background trees are equal. (surely this extends to all other backgrounds as well but I find interest in the trees, atm).
Today I was shooting an object that had a US hwy as a background, from that side anyway. But I just squatted til my background horizon only included pine trees. They didn't distract because the needles are so small they already carry a blur at such distances. Even relatively close, pine gives you a subtle background that is easily obscured if necessary. But when you go shooting in front of a fig tree
(?) you have a much larger repeat pattern such that the leaves here compete as individual objects for attention. I will be watching this factor going forward as I have a new fig tree and I look forward to its fruit, if not its background.
I haven't quite figured out Lens Cap's trick and I wished he would share more, but I do like the work.
I am not looking to lecture, but to acknowledge an insight I garnered due to this conversation. But now it seems obvious and I even feel a little silly, but that's discovery for ya!
Oct 17, 2012 04:38:02 #
The background is a bit busy you could try standing the subjects further away from the background if possible also use a bigger aperture f 5 ish to blur the background out more or faster shutter by increasing the ISo but be careful of grain in the picture nice family :P
Oct 17, 2012 07:41:17 #
All I did in this instance was to select the back ground (using the freehand tool)with a feather set to about 5. Then add the blurr effect until satisfied(3-4 times).I hope this helps DebartzCreations.
Oct 17, 2012 08:36:52 #
Hello jpy56
I have the same problem when I look at group shots, I now try to get a feel for the background before getting people into place, your background is not to busy in my opinion, what you could look at in the future is the composition of the group and who is where. With regards to the house could it be part of the story of the group, family house? you could if it were possible use it as the background. Good luck and enjoy your photos.
Geoff Gregory
I have the same problem when I look at group shots, I now try to get a feel for the background before getting people into place, your background is not to busy in my opinion, what you could look at in the future is the composition of the group and who is where. With regards to the house could it be part of the story of the group, family house? you could if it were possible use it as the background. Good luck and enjoy your photos.
Geoff Gregory
Oct 17, 2012 13:21:57 #
Lens Cap wrote:
All I did in this instance was to select the back ground (using the freehand tool)with a feather set to about 5. Then add the blurr effect until satisfied(3-4 times).I hope this helps DebartzCreations.
Well it is a great effect considering the actual proximity of the leaves and you seem to have magically pushed them back in the scene. Yes, that was helpful. Thank you.
Oct 17, 2012 20:56:18 #
JPY56, I hope you don't mind. I worked with your second picture to show what you can do with layers. There are three layers, the background, the females, and the male. The females are layered on top of the background getting rid of the house. The male was then placed on top of the females making it look like the lady in blue is standing behind the man. Then cropped on center. Hope you enjoy.
Lens cap
Lens cap
Close family
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.