Steve'sDigicams

squirl033 · Jan 21, 2006, 2:09 PM

i was messin' around in PS last nite, trying out the various filters to make photos look like paintings. i liked the way these pics came out, and i'm considering prints. i know these really belong in the Digital Art forum, but thought i'd post 'em here too, just to see what you all think...

the gull was done using the "water color" feature...

used the "water color" filter again, and added the sun in this shot using the "lens flare" feature...

for this one, i used the "dry brush" feature, i thought it gave the pic a sort of impressionist look... and it's the kind of scene popular with such artists...

audioedge · Jan 21, 2006, 2:19 PM

there pretty cool, and yes they'd be better in the digital art forum!

one small critique, or rather my own personal opinion, is that simply changing a normal photo to a Photoshop effected one isnt enough. You need to bring more interest into the picture by using several techniques, not just one filter

cheers for posting tho

squirl033 · Jan 21, 2006, 2:26 PM

audioedge wrote:

Quote:

there pretty cool, and yes they'd be better in the digital art forum!

one small critique, or rather my own personal opinion, is that simply changing a normal photo to a Photoshop effected one isnt enough. You need to bring more interest into the picture by using several techniques, not just one filter

cheers for posting tho

yeah, i guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve...

Peggyo · Jan 21, 2006, 8:12 PM

I really like these, especially the 2 water color ones. Thanks for posting them here. I got Photoshop 4.0 as a gift this Christmas and I'm just starting to get it figured out .I am going to try some like these too!

roy123 · Jan 22, 2006, 12:27 AM

squirl...i think all 3 are wonderful and like peggyo said, i'm glad you posted them here or i may have missed them...one last thing regarding audioedge's critique...i am a firm believer in the 'less is more' philosophy and it i had created those the #1 pic would be in a frame...i think it's beautiful as it is...

good work,

Ray

Corpsy · Jan 22, 2006, 1:35 AM

Personally, I'm not a big fan of simply applying a filter to create a piece. When I look at an image that is presented as art, I try to imagine what the artist was thinking when creating it, and when I look at Photoshop filtered images, I think, "He's trying to trick me into thinking he's a painter." Basically, I'm agreeing with Audioedge.

Assuming I didn't mind the filter so much though, here's some suggestions. On the first image, I don't think any painter would make an image like that. A painter would try to achieve a greater sense of drama by cropping much closer or adding some interesting detail around the subject. The advantage to using filters like this is you can enlarge an image well past the point of looking awful, but then all imperfections go away when you filter it.

The second image I think is closest to achieving the look of a real painting. My biggest complaint though would be the lens flare. It's not enough to make it look like "digital art", but it's far more than enough to shatter the illusion that this might have been painted. Also, I'd either trim most of the sky off, or add some interesting clouds.

The third one has a very painted look, but the scene doesn't look like something that would inspire anyone to take the time to paint it. A painter would probably just take a picture of it. Trimming off a big chunk of the bottom, and maybe a bit of the top would help.

roy123 · Jan 22, 2006, 2:26 AM

gotta love quasi-elitist snobbery...lol...

squirl033 · Jan 22, 2006, 10:52 AM

Corpsy, you'd be amazed at the "stuff" people will paint. go to a gallery sometime and look at some of the techniques and subject matter! that's the neat thing about art... and what you don't like, someone else does. it's extremely subjective, and what you think you know about art means nothing to someone who's not trying to achieve the sameresult you would. i've seen paintings that i thought were marvelous that left others cold, and i've seen critically acclaimed (or very high priced) works that left me wondering why the hell the artist bothered to dirty a brush - assuming he even used one!

as for the use of filters like these, i'm not exactly a fan of them myself, as anyone who's been a member of this forumfor any length of time can tell you. i seldom use them in any form, because for the most part, i prefer photographs to paintings, and as a rule, i prefer them to look as much like what i saw through the lens as possible. which is why i'm a photographer, not a painter. like i said in the beginning, i was just fooling around (actually, it's been so long since the weather's been nice enough to go out and shoot, that i've been bored to tears!) withsome filters that make pics look like watercolors or whatever, and thought these looked kinda neat, so i though i'd share the ideas...

tiger98 · Jan 22, 2006, 1:50 PM

Well said Squirl ! I couldn't agree with you more! I thought all three pictures looked good considering you were only experimenting with the filters not trying to create a masterpiece!......or were you? :-) Jimsquirl033 wrote:

Quote:

Corpsy, you'd be amazed at the "stuff" people will paint. go to a gallery sometime and look at some of the techniques and subject matter! that's the neat thing about art... and what you don't like, someone else does. it's extremely subjective, and what you think you know about art means nothing to someone who's not trying to achieve the sameresult you would. i've seen paintings that i thought were marvelous that left others cold, and i've seen critically acclaimed (or very high priced) works that left me wondering why the heck the artist bothered to dirty a brush - assuming he even used one!

as for the use of filters like these, i'm not exactly a fan of them myself, as anyone who's been a member of this forumfor any length of time can tell you. i seldom use them in any form, because for the most part, i prefer photographs to paintings, and as a rule, i prefer them to look as much like what i saw through the lens as possible. which is why i'm a photographer, not a painter. like i said in the beginning, i was just fooling around (actually, it's been so long since the weather's been nice enough to go out and shoot, that i've been bored to tears!) withsome filters that make pics look like watercolors or whatever, and thought these looked kinda neat, so i though i'd share the ideas...

Telecorder · Jan 24, 2006, 12:11 PM

Thanks for the posting! Given that I'm mostly concerned with getting GREAT digi photos, your posting points out that one can still have a GREAT 'artsy-photo' ready for printing of a digi photo with a little effort in PP.

The only problem I see now is that maybe my 120-GB new hard drive will have a few less deleted photos with slightly OOF images awaiting their turn being PP...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Jan 21, 2006, 2:09 PM	#1
squirl033 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,915	i was messin' around in PS last nite, trying out the various filters to make photos look like paintings. i liked the way these pics came out, and i'm considering prints. i know these really belong in the Digital Art forum, but thought i'd post 'em here too, just to see what you all think... the gull was done using the "water color" feature... used the "water color" filter again, and added the sun in this shot using the "lens flare" feature... for this one, i used the "dry brush" feature, i thought it gave the pic a sort of impressionist look... and it's the kind of scene popular with such artists...

Jan 21, 2006, 2:19 PM	#2
audioedge Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 254	there pretty cool, and yes they'd be better in the digital art forum! one small critique, or rather my own personal opinion, is that simply changing a normal photo to a Photoshop effected one isnt enough. You need to bring more interest into the picture by using several techniques, not just one filter cheers for posting tho

Jan 21, 2006, 8:12 PM	#4
Peggyo Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 137	I really like these, especially the 2 water color ones. Thanks for posting them here. I got Photoshop 4.0 as a gift this Christmas and I'm just starting to get it figured out .I am going to try some like these too!

Jan 22, 2006, 12:27 AM	#5
roy123 Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 84	squirl...i think all 3 are wonderful and like peggyo said, i'm glad you posted them here or i may have missed them...one last thing regarding audioedge's critique...i am a firm believer in the 'less is more' philosophy and it i had created those the #1 pic would be in a frame...i think it's beautiful as it is... good work, Ray

Jan 22, 2006, 1:35 AM	#6
Corpsy Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 879	Personally, I'm not a big fan of simply applying a filter to create a piece. When I look at an image that is presented as art, I try to imagine what the artist was thinking when creating it, and when I look at Photoshop filtered images, I think, "He's trying to trick me into thinking he's a painter." Basically, I'm agreeing with Audioedge. Assuming I didn't mind the filter so much though, here's some suggestions. On the first image, I don't think any painter would make an image like that. A painter would try to achieve a greater sense of drama by cropping much closer or adding some interesting detail around the subject. The advantage to using filters like this is you can enlarge an image well past the point of looking awful, but then all imperfections go away when you filter it. The second image I think is closest to achieving the look of a real painting. My biggest complaint though would be the lens flare. It's not enough to make it look like "digital art", but it's far more than enough to shatter the illusion that this might have been painted. Also, I'd either trim most of the sky off, or add some interesting clouds. The third one has a very painted look, but the scene doesn't look like something that would inspire anyone to take the time to paint it. A painter would probably just take a picture of it. Trimming off a big chunk of the bottom, and maybe a bit of the top would help.

Jan 22, 2006, 2:26 AM	#7
roy123 Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 84	gotta love quasi-elitist snobbery...lol...

Jan 22, 2006, 10:52 AM	#8
squirl033 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,915	Corpsy, you'd be amazed at the "stuff" people will paint. go to a gallery sometime and look at some of the techniques and subject matter! that's the neat thing about art... and what you don't like, someone else does. it's extremely subjective, and what you think you know about art means nothing to someone who's not trying to achieve the sameresult you would. i've seen paintings that i thought were marvelous that left others cold, and i've seen critically acclaimed (or very high priced) works that left me wondering why the hell the artist bothered to dirty a brush - assuming he even used one! as for the use of filters like these, i'm not exactly a fan of them myself, as anyone who's been a member of this forumfor any length of time can tell you. i seldom use them in any form, because for the most part, i prefer photographs to paintings, and as a rule, i prefer them to look as much like what i saw through the lens as possible. which is why i'm a photographer, not a painter. like i said in the beginning, i was just fooling around (actually, it's been so long since the weather's been nice enough to go out and shoot, that i've been bored to tears!) withsome filters that make pics look like watercolors or whatever, and thought these looked kinda neat, so i though i'd share the ideas...

Jan 24, 2006, 12:11 PM	#10
Telecorder Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 490	Thanks for the posting! Given that I'm mostly concerned with getting GREAT digi photos, your posting points out that one can still have a GREAT 'artsy-photo' ready for printing of a digi photo with a little effort in PP. The only problem I see now is that maybe my 120-GB new hard drive will have a few less deleted photos with slightly OOF images awaiting their turn being PP...