Posts for: yssirk123
Feb 5, 2017 19:22:59 #
ken_stern wrote:
I of course have nothing at all against what you did -- Actually Nice Effort - However -- From my personal perspective which only includes anything ever coming out of my camera ---
I just don't like it --
I say the real challenge is try shooting for the "real thing"
I just don't like it --
I say the real challenge is try shooting for the "real thing"
Thanks for looking.
Feb 5, 2017 19:21:56 #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
Who cares? Art is subjective. If you find the final result pleasing, what difference does it make?
Thanks for your comment. I do like the end result.
Feb 5, 2017 12:55:21 #
GWR100 wrote:
Good on ya, keep floating you boat-------
Thanks for your comment!
Feb 5, 2017 12:19:03 #
GWR100 wrote:
That is so refreshing to hear, there are far too many people ready to decry the art of producing a picture from an electronic image. Is it photography, yes of course it is, as it always has been. As for you picture, there is a lot that is very interesting on it, and while Im not familiar with the software you are using I can see where yours would benefit from control different elements of the picture. Keep working from you mind, I love it,
Geoff
Geoff
Thanks for your comment Geoff. I think its fun to try different things, and I am okay if it doesn't float everyone's boat.
Feb 5, 2017 12:15:21 #
BTW, I made a 16x24 print of this image using Qimage. Mike Chaney (creator of Qimage) has a new interpolation method that allows you to double the native resolution of your printer. For a Canon printer that means you can now print at 1200 dpi instead of 600 dpi. The output was pretty amazing.
If this is of interest, here is a link to the article on the ddisoftware website: http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/tech-prt.htm
I am not affiliated in anyway with Qimage, other than having used the software for the last 10 years or so. Hope all is well.
If this is of interest, here is a link to the article on the ddisoftware website: http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/tech-prt.htm
I am not affiliated in anyway with Qimage, other than having used the software for the last 10 years or so. Hope all is well.
Feb 5, 2017 11:52:03 #
Kmgw9v wrote:
I strongly agree. The lightening is a lie.
Thanks for looking.
Feb 5, 2017 11:51:06 #
G Brown wrote:
I like what you drew out of the rocks and especially the waves below the rocks.
The sky and sand I feel is too much. So which particular programme did that? Adding lightening....probably not on that particular image but as a practice 'why not'.
have fun
The sky and sand I feel is too much. So which particular programme did that? Adding lightening....probably not on that particular image but as a practice 'why not'.
have fun
Thanks for your comment. The sky and sand adjustments were Topaz Adjust.
Feb 5, 2017 10:10:42 #
kymarto wrote:
For me it goes way beyond the bounds of enhancing a photograph in post processing. I'm a believer in optimization, but not in addition.
Thanks for your comment. My goal was not to enhance the photo, but to see if I could create the image that I had in my mind.
Feb 5, 2017 10:05:28 #
Spider223 wrote:
Great to see that you are able to use the tools available to be creative. I don't see anything wrong with graphic manipulation to achieve what you envision the end photo should be. No different than going in and changing exposure compensation on your RAW image after the fact. Creativity is what it's all about, and your end result is nice, even without the lightning effect.
Thanks Spider223. I knew when I posted there would some objections, and I'm okay with that. That's one of the reasons I included the before and after uploads. I knew at the outset where I wanted take this image, and was curious to see if I could do it.
Feb 5, 2017 10:01:19 #
kymarto wrote:
For me it goes way beyond the bounds of enhancing a photograph in post processing. I'm a believer in optimization, but not in addition.
Thanks for looking!
Feb 5, 2017 10:00:45 #
ELNikkor wrote:
Second one is more dramatic, but the lightning on the right should be deleted, it looks too fakey; at first, I thought it was the negative of a tree branch silouette...
Thanks for your comment!
Feb 5, 2017 10:00:10 #
NormanTheGr8 wrote:
So your a graphic artist now ? Although the special effects look great it really does , can you look yourself in the eye and say I shot that, or do you say I made that computer generated picture?
Thanks for your comment. The answer to your question is Yes, thats what I was going for.
Feb 5, 2017 09:59:23 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Interesting, especially the lightning touch.
Very good.
Very good.
Thanks for looking!
Feb 5, 2017 09:56:57 #
Feb 5, 2017 08:41:33 #
Still playing around with Anthropics' LandscapePro software. Had some free time one overcast morning, so I took a ride to the Jersey shore. It was a pretty overcast day, but I thought it might be fun to grab some images and see what could be done with them. The before is the orginal image; the after was run through LandscapePro, Photoshop and Topaz Adjust.
