Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Digital Art (modified digicam images)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 28, 2005, 4:23 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Walter C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 7,747
Default

Think I'd agree with Creeduk. Didn't those 19th century photographers use those exploding flash pans? That would probably account for the overexposure of closer figures.
Walter C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2005, 1:23 AM   #22
csh
Junior Member
 
csh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 22
Default

Walter C wrote:
Quote:
Peter

Yes, I could have spent a bit more time working with the bottom of the shoe, rifle butt and pant leg. Thanks for the observation.

Walter
It's a nice effort, but the thing which I noticed before the blending was the lighting. It's obvious that the lighting on the soldier is different from the lighting in the field.

You might also consider creating a sepia image out of this after some more editing work, which would make it look more like a Civil War photo anyway, and would cure some of the lighting difference.

csh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2005, 3:46 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Walter C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 7,747
Default

csh

Good idea, thanks. Unfortunately, I'm in Atlanta on business and can't try this until I'm back home in Texas. Appreciate the suggestion.

Walter
Walter C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2005, 4:22 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
creeduk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 365
Default

csh, not sure if you saw the additions at the bottom of page 1?

Rather than sepia, you could go with a color version of the B&W. I know seems crazy, take a color go to B&W and then color it in but that was also a version available back then, usually the officers portraits but still they did hand color the prints.
creeduk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2005, 11:08 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
Paul(UK)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 290
Default

choeschen wrote:
Quote:
I tried the drop shadow on a new layer but that did look like a real shadow. So I duplicated the background layer and cut out everything but him on that layer. From here I transformed it until it look like it was laying on its side like a shadow would. Then I adjusted the curves to make it all black and adjusted the layer opaciaty to about 40% and here is the end result. Of course the shadow is not in line with the direction the sun is (it looks like the shadow should move forward and to my right but then you would not see much of the shadow) but I wanted to show you how the shadow looks using this method.

Would you get a shadow like that on a misty day? I'd have thought just a bit of burn tool on the ground around and under the man would have been enough.
Paul(UK) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2005, 5:09 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Walter C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 7,747
Default

Paul

I would agree about the shadow being out of place. When I took the photo of the misty field I thought I would get even more of the foggy and misty look, since it was more visible to my eye at the time. Certainly no weather for shadows.

Walter
Walter C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2005, 2:38 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Canna W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,038
Default

Creeduk,

That last b & w is . I think the pic now reeks age and character.

Canna
Canna W is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:46 PM.