I like the photo, except the shadow is too dark. Lighten the shadow on the face, but don't eliminate it and you'll have a shot that's easy to envy.

Well, I've been following your photographic growth since your early days here on the hog, and I must say you have learned a lot and gotten much better. Sorry to say, though, this isn't one of your better efforts, even though you admit that your playing around with Photoshop, it seems that you got a little lazy with this one in regards to your craftsmanship. I'm being frank because I know you appreciate bluntness, and honesty, and you're no stranger to dishing it out yourself. But here are the two problems I see with this photo, the tornado that you imported just looks wrong, it looks more like a curved metal rod than a tornado, you can do better. The 2nd issue I have is where you composited the tornado in under her arm, if you don't enlarge the photo it looks like there's a chunk of skin missing under the arm, or the underarm curve looks wrong, or something.

Your contribution to the Hog are amazing with now over 44,000 posts, your sense of humor is always good natured, and your comments usually hit the bullseye.

Hi Cyn - ummm, it looks like your kitchen is a fun place to be, can I come? I thought I was making progress on learning how to compost images, but after looking at your work, I realize that I have a very, very long way to go.

Any imperfections that YOU might see will go un-noticed by all the rest of us. Nice job. Bye the way, I'll bring my own whipped cream.

So, I have a growing collection of reference photos that I plan to use, some day, for compositing images, an example of which is the subject of this post. This composite photo contains 5 unrelated images, taken at different times and places, which, obviously, I have made into one image that really only exists in my mind. I've been told that I don't have enough to do. But I really enjoy photography, and I'm working on learning Photoshop (does anyone ever get to the point where they 'know' Photoshop?. Well, anyway, here it is, after a bunch of hours working o it. Some things I like, others I don't. If you've gotten this far, and you have any comments (other than I need more Photoshop practice) please let me know.

I also posted this in the critique section, but I think those folks are shy and don't want to say anything unkind. Over the years I've grown skin that's about 2 feet thick, so please be honest. We'll still be friends no matter what you say.

(Download)

you caught it all in your image, the well worn wood, the volume and serviceability of the ceramic pieces, the thickness of the structure walls, and the light . . . . wow. As they say, you must have a really good camera!

Linda, S. WOW! I didn't expect such a favorable comment. Thank you, thank you very much. And, yes, I try with most of my photos to make a subtle comment about being human and our vulnerabilities as social creatures. Often in my photos, as in this one, my human figure (which is composited) often has his or her back turned (a subtle comment on what I feel we often do to each other) to the person holding the camera. Anyway, thank you for looking and commenting, you comment made my day.

This 'photo' is a combination or composite of at least 5 different photos taken at different times and different locations. What I'm trying to do is use some of my reference shots to make something that doesn't really exist anywhere but in my own imagination but still tell some kind of story. How close is this to being convincing, and yes, I know I still need a lot more Photoshop practice to get to where I'd like to be, but I'm working at it.

As an idea for a painting, maybe. As a photograph, there isn’t much here to get excited about.

You contributed more than you realized, unfortunately, ahead of its time open minded leadership like you demonstrated, is usually thankless. I, for one, hates to see you throw in the towel, please reconsider your decision.

By all means, have at it, and 3D it to your hearts content. If you would be so kind as to keep me occasionally in the loop, I would appreciate it. Any future winnings we’ll split 50/50. 😁

well, it just occurred to me that I have said that I have made changes to the photo per your many suggestions, but I haven't posted an updated image. Now I'm going to try to figure out how to do just that, and if you don't see an updated image, it 'cause I'm unable to figure out how to do it.

Stephan G, you asked how many images were used in the composite, the answer is 6.

Dave, Your sophisticated comments regarding my complex composition tells me that you are no stranger to trying compositing in some of your own work. I like addressing some of the challenges you so readily identify, with my stuff, and I have started thinking that every image I capture is one that is meant to be manipulated and then pushed and shoved, and then turned into something it did not start out to be. Even though I'm really quite new to compositing, for me it's fun. Probably a good thing because I feel that the 'out of camera' promoters are simply missing an opportunity to create interest and a story, and changing an image from a look into 'our' world into a look into 'my' world.

thank you for taking the time to look at my photo and comment so Kindly,
Jon

relying on the etymology of a word as a rebuttal is a double edged sword - the meanings of words change, both connotative and denotative, is writing at all related to writing as it was thought of by our grandparents, as something we do by hand, with a pencil and paper, no, it's now something we do with our fingertips that press on a keyboard that sends electronic signals to a central processor that interprets the signals and presents to the viewer text that can be read. So, the meaning of words evolve, so should our thinking. That light is used by photographers to do what? Well, it's pretty obvious that light is used to make an image, and if there wasn't an image, well, photographers would be like horseshoes, rare and hard to find. I think photography is about making images, and images tell stories. As technology advances, and becomes much more sophisticated than the above examples, I would be willing to bet that the storytellers and the image makers of the future will give a hoot about whether an image was made the traditional way or by creating an image using x's and O's. Is a digital image still an image, or does it have to by analog on film to be a real image. Does it have to be made in a camera, using a lens, to be a real image written with light, or can a digital image created on a computer, which is what our cameras really are now, still be an image. Is photography's entomology really important, aren't we really trying to improve our image-making skills and our story-telling skills, isn't the end result we're looking for, a successful impactful image more important than whether we used an old Kodak Brownie or a Hasselbald medium format 100 megapixel camera, or a computer.

Does money exist without being printed on paper, can stuff be transported without sitting on a ship, can books be written without the use of a pencil, can an image be created without the use of a lens, can a mind be changed without the use of a scalpel (probably not) but it's an interesting argument that we can't take all this too seriously, and the world continues to change around us, and so does everything we know, and an image that starts to look and feel like a photograph, does it have to be made by a glass lens attached to a camera, either analog or digital, to be a photograph. And has the meaning of the word photograph changed to mean something more than the original meaning, and now might include the concept of an image that is static, as opposed to a movie.

So, I agree that the above image isn't a photograph in the traditional sense, but it's still an image, and might even fool the uninformed observer into thinking it was a photograph. We may not like it, we might never choose to use something like that, but let's be interested in what's developing out 'there' and be grateful that an Ugly Hedgehog is taking his incredibly valuable time to show us what's being developed.

Those of us who are not slaves to the traditionalists and ‘out of camera’ brigade, who try to push our photography to new levels of story telling, not merely persevering a visual history with little emotion, understand what you are doing and why you have posted these images without asking why. Those who castigate are likely technicians, who think a proper exposure is more important than emotional impact of an image, are stuck in the past and have no vision or interest in the future.

I apologize for the abuse you have received from the incurious “Uglies”, and thank you for giving us a glimpse of what the future might offer, whether we like it or not, looking and trying to understand is always better than a judgemental dismissal and then sticking your head in the sand.

Those of us who are not slaves to the traditionalists and ‘out of camera’ brigade, who try to push our photography to new levels of story telling, not merely persevering a visual history with little emotion, understand what you are doing and why you have posted these images without asking why. Those who castigate are likely technicians, who think a proper exposure is more important than emotional impact of an image, are stuck in the past and have no vision or interest in the future.

I apologize for the abuse you have received from the incurious “Uglies”, and thank you for giving us a glimpse of what the future might offer, whether we like it or not, looking and trying to understand is always better than a judgemental dismissal and then sticking your head in the sand.