Adamaski Effect (Page 2): Thanks for the reply. I have done several of these using the Path Blur Tool inside of Photoshop CC. I think it's an interesting effect and yours are quite...

Fstop12 Loc: Kentucky

Physlab wrote:

All the post-processing was done using ON1 Photo RAW. I did not use layers, although that is an option.

Lowell

Thanks for the reply. I have done several of these using the Path Blur Tool inside of Photoshop CC. I think it's an interesting effect and yours are quite nice.

DougS Loc: Central Arkansas

Neat effect! I like how it isolates the subject.

Basil Loc: New Mexico

Here is one I did a while back of a surfer off the coast at Sunset Cliffs Park near San Diego.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Physlab wrote:

The artistic effect is to hold one subject in focus and blur the remaining photograph.

I misspelled the effect. Look up Adamski Effect and you will find some eye catching images.

Lowell

So, “panning” 😜🤪

Basil Loc: New Mexico

SuperflyTNT wrote:

So, “panning” 😜🤪

You can get similar effects with panning, but the Adamaski effect gives you a lot more artistic license an allows you to create effects that you would not have from just panning.

User ID

Basil wrote:

You can get similar effects with panning, but the Adamaski effect gives you a lot more artistic license an allows you to create effects that you would not have from just panning.

That may be true yet the opposite is true. Panning has a beautiful aesthetic that this filter cannot touch, but if you want a super clean uncluttered effect, go with the filter.

I dont see this filter as fake panning. Its not doing that. Its almost a "streaky bokeh" but not really bokeh either. Its another way of deleting background details yet keeping the color, so it does have that much in common with huge aperture effects.

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

Good job. You also caught the shadow.

L.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

NickGee wrote:

I don't see that the effect adds anything to the composition. Quite the contrary. I find it terribly distracting, like AI fakery. Is this a filter of some sort that's used? I'm not familiar with the effect.

I agree with you. Looks like we are the odd men out. I am tired of seeing the artsy-fartsy gimmickry in photography. I guess if you cannot get a good photo, go to the presets to obscure that. I am sure this will inspire a lot of criticism. I get that but if you are going to be nasty, do not reply. I am open to civil discourse with people of all opinions on this topic.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Physlab wrote:

BDK,

There are numerous PS YouTube videos on the Adamaski Effect, but few using ON1 so I came up with my own method. I'm sure you have looked at many.

Here is another example. I should take more time to refine the edges of the locomotive, but that can come later.

Lowell

This looks like a model train. I would have liked seeing the original instead. Probably had real possibilities.

Fstop12 Loc: Kentucky

abc1234 wrote:

I agree with you. Looks like we are the odd men out. I am tired of seeing the artsy-fartsy gimmickry in photography. I guess if you cannot get a good photo, go to the presets to obscure that. I am sure this will inspire a lot of criticism. I get that but if you are going to be nasty, do not reply. I am open to civil discourse with people of all opinions on this topic.

"Artsy-fartsy" isn't for everyone. Also, I don't think the Josh Adamski effect is about using a bad photo. More using an isolated element from a good photo to create a piece of digital art. Who is Josh Adamski? Tel Aviv born, living in England and Tel Aviv photographer Josh Adamski has specialized in colorful, surreal photo impressionism art. With a fanciful image processing technique is he primarily coastal landscapes to create a fabulous mix of photography and abstract line drawings, Josh Adamski lives near the sea, his greatest inspiration. love art, and focuses mainly on unique seascapes and landscapes, which he transforms into distinctive images using his unique processing technique. This special style was devised by Josh Adamski himself and has attracted many followers worldwide.

As far as I know, the effect isn't created by using any "Preset" rather it takes some Photoshop/Post Processing software skills to achieve the look. Here is a video presentation by well known Photoshop expert:
Nicole S. Young showing how it's done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuVibZdLoIM
When done correctly, you will produce a piece of surreal photo impressionism art.

Physlab Loc: Portland, OR

abc1234 wrote:

I agree with you. Looks like we are the odd men out. I am tired of seeing the artsy-fartsy gimmickry in photography. I guess if you cannot get a good photo, go to the presets to obscure that. I am sure this will inspire a lot of criticism. I get that but if you are going to be nasty, do not reply. I am open to civil discourse with people of all opinions on this topic.

Why mess about with effects such as the Adamski? I enjoy experimentation and working with different effects ends up teaching me more about the post-processing tools I have available.

Once the sun returns to Oregon I plan an "assault" on infrared photography. Not that every photo needs this application, but it will require me to use different techniques both with camera, iPhone, and software. Call it an educational experience.

I have software tools that convert photographs to paintings in the style of famous painters. While this is not appealing to many viewers, and many conversions are failures in my opinion, I still enjoy the experimentation.

The above explains in part why I plan to push my photographic limits.

Lowell

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Fstop12 wrote:

"Artsy-fartsy" isn't for everyone. Also,... (show quote)

Thank you for your good comments. I did look Adamski up. In those days, doing things like this required great imagination and technical skill. I certainly admire that. One way of achieving that was by smearing Vaseline on a glass negative carrier in the enlarger. My gripe is that the presets require so little imagination and skill in our digital world and seem more to cover up a bad photo than to enhance a good one. I encourage experimentation but beware of the results. They do not always result in "fine art".

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Physlab wrote:

Why mess about with effects such as the Adamski? ... (show quote)

Good comments. As I stated elsewhere on UHH, I started photography in 1959 when we had trouble getting good photos from a technical standpoint. (Great composition was easier to achieve.) That is still my goal. Accuse me on not changing with the times but this is my photographic sensibility. My experimenting is to get sharper pictures with great colors. As for you, keep experimenting and posting.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

User ID wrote:

That may be true yet the opposite is true. Panning has a beautiful aesthetic that this filter cannot touch, but if you want a super clean uncluttered effect, go with the filter.

I dont see this filter as fake panning. Its not doing that. Its almost a "streaky bokeh" but not really bokeh either. Its another way of deleting background details yet keeping the color, so it does have that much in common with huge aperture effects.

After clicking and checking Adamski’s stuff I didn’t see much to like

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

abc1234 wrote:

Thank you for your good comments. I did look Adam... (show quote)

In those days? He’s current.