Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 16, 2007, 4:09 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
bluwing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 592
Default

Hi,

It is amazing what you can do with junk and be able to sell it as art... Anyway this is done with my version of that technique.

Rudy
Attached Images
 
bluwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 5:22 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 711
Default

Black Knight wrote:
Quote:
ennacac wrote:
Quote:
I think you shoud reduce the opacity of the new layer even more than 50% to get rid of the extreme contrast, otherwise I like it.

Tom
Mtngal

Im With Tom on this. Great picture but,IMHO Way to Contrasty


Phil
Sorry..Off Topic..I love your Avatar..One of my favorite Monte Python Films..
benjikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 16, 2007, 11:26 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Ben posted a link to an article in Pentax Life in this thread: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80- when I read it originally I thought his amount of sharpening was way too much, but found out that it works quite well with many subjects. Then he goes on to add a duplicate layer, manipulate it further and then change the opacity to let the original image blend with the changes. I'm going back to see if I can tone down the contrast, but for this particular one, I thought the "over-the-top" look appropriate.

As I look at it again, I decided that it looks more like a collapsed cement hand-mixer than a bucket that a horse kicked.

P.S. I looked at it again, and figured out how to make additional changes in the duplicate layer (double clicked on it once I had added the soft light effect) and got it to be less over-the-top. While it was an improvement, it wasn't enough different to post it.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2007, 1:27 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 583
Default

I decided to give benjikan's method a try. I modified it slightly to suit my workflow habits. I converted the image to LAB color, did an USMon the lightness channel at 330%, 0.3px, 0; I did the 2nd USM according to the instructions. Then I reconverted to RGB and used the channel mixer to obtain a good contrast between the shadows and highlights of the sculpture. Finally, I duplicated the layer and applied the soft light at 50%.
Attached Images
 
Illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2007, 1:52 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 711
Default

mtngal wrote:
Quote:
Ben posted a link to an article in Pentax Life in this thread: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...60&forum_id=80*- when I read it originally I thought his amount of sharpening was way too much, but found out that it works quite well with many subjects.* Then he goes on to add a duplicate layer, manipulate it further and then change the opacity to let the original image blend with the changes.* I'm going back to see if I can tone down the contrast, but for this particular one, I thought the "over-the-top" look appropriate.

As I look at it again, I decided that it looks more like a collapsed cement hand-mixer than a bucket that a horse kicked.

P.S. I looked at it again, and figured out how to make additional changes in the duplicate layer (double clicked on it once I had added the soft light effect) and got it to be less over-the-top.* While it was an improvement, it wasn't enough different to post it.
I also Posted an alternative Workflow Method and created a Thread for it:



When the Raw image has been imported in to Camera Raw, I Sharpen at between 25-30 on the slider and 50 on Color Noise Reduction, Luminance Smoothing at Zero. Click OK.

When in Photoshop, go to Layers and make a Duplicate Layer. Now Desaturate the image. Go to the Layers Menu and click on Soft Light. Now, because you didn't use the Contrast Unsharp move, i.e. 10-15 percent at 40-60 pixels you can push the Opacity and Fill sliders much harder. 60 to 90 percent. When back in PS you can now push up your overall Saturation if so desired by +5 to +10 to compensate in the loss of Saturation produced by adding the B&W layer. I don't, I like that Desaturated look. It's a matter of taste..

Ben

You can compare it to other method that is posted at:
http://pentaxlife.com/benjamin-kanar...ethod#more-213
benjikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2007, 1:54 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 583
Default

Here's another using my own workflow settings for comparison.
Attached Images
 
Illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2007, 11:20 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
sgarthee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 154
Default

A little off topic but does anyone think this is a Largemouth Bass that was caught up in the Philadelphia Experiment?

Maybe I am just getting too itchy for warmer temps.:-)
sgarthee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2007, 1:14 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 583
Default

sgarthee wrote:
Quote:
A little off topic but does anyone think this is a Largemouth Bass that was caught up in the Philadelphia Experiment?

Maybe I am just getting too itchy for warmer temps.:-)
Well, it does remind me of that electronic singing bass that I threw thru the wall after hearing it sing one too many times.
Illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2007, 3:06 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

sgarthee wrote:
Quote:
A little off topic but does anyone think this is a Largemouth Bass that was caught up in the Philadelphia Experiment?

Maybe I am just getting too itchy for warmer temps.:-)
LOL! It does, sort-of. If the point of modern sculpture is to stimulate one's imagination and conversation, this one is successful. My first reaction to it was a bucket that a horse kicked, then I decided it looked like a cement mixer that got smashed. Then someone else suggested it looked like a pile of junk. Now it's a mutated largemouth bass! Any more thoughts on what this looks like?
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 19, 2007, 5:35 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

I'll second pile of junk


Phil



Black Knight 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 3:31 AM.