Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Photo Critiques

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 6, 2009, 7:17 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

As I found, that I "removed" the background a bit too much, here's a slight modification:
Attached Images
 
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2009, 7:22 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

I kept the images in it's oversaturated form, of course you could get rid of the colors very easily.

The question is, where do you want to go with such modifications? Concentrating on fine details, or more on the branch... or whatever. Even without cropping you can do a lot with that picture.

There are also nice b&w versions with just showing the branch etc. - just play around.

I'll have a go at cropping next if you don't mind, but at first there is time for lunch now
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2009, 8:15 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

From the crops I did I like this one in portrait orientation best. It follows the golden sample rule and I tried to work with the grass and the branch to make things interesting. I added a little "art" experiment as well, which I call "bad weather".

Hope you like it,
Th.
Attached Images
 
thkn777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2009, 4:49 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
bahadir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
Default



@ TH. Imust say I quite liked the 'out of place' 'out of time' lookinyour 'Blue Hour' interpretation!
bahadir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2009, 11:38 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

This is fun! Th - your blue one, while it's not at all what I was thinking, is quite interesting, and I like your bad weather one. I'm not as crazy about the other two. Like my original picture, I'm not quite sure why.

Since I know the OOF foreground bothers me, and since tjsnaps mentioned vignetting, I came up with this as a possible way of dealing with it. Of course, I took another picture that was a close-up of the top of the branches, and another one of the lower, smaller branches. They are OK (though I did have some focus/DOF problems) but I'm not sure they have the right feeling to them.

What do people think of this one? Did I go too far with it?
Attached Images
 
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 7:10 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

You have nicely eliminated the out of focus foreground except for that annoying branch that points to center from the 3 o'clock position. You have gone too far in the top left corner with no detail at all in it. But overall I like this shot better now than your original. Perhaps a tweak in cropping would help as well as the removal of that branch.
Attached Images
 
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 7:58 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,156
Default

Hi,

I guess everyone is going in the same direction but here is your shot with a bit of diffuse glow and a touch more feathering. I didn't bother to clone out the branch in the upper right corner as it doesn't bother me.




zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 8:32 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

The branch in the upper right corner isnt out of focus and never an issue I think. Its the one from 3 O'CLOCK POSITION which stretches left to almost middle. Its very out of focus and, to me, very distracting.
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 11:16 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I know which branch you mean, and you did a very nice job of cloning it out, Bynx. I hadn't particularly noticed it last night as I was concentrating on remembering ways to do the mask/vignette effect. The funny thing is that I didn't quite figure out all of the steps to do what I had in mind, but thought what I got in my fumbling around quite appropriate to what I was looking for. I didn't actually look at the tree all that much.

I'll have to think about the upper left corner - the original doesn't have much detail/information inthat cornerto begin with and I'm not so sure I can bring out detail there without running into problems. Adding the mask does bring out the fact that the tree wasn't completely framed,something I didn't think was a problem in the original due to the distracting foreground. It's a case that when you start messing with one thing, you end up introducing other issues - a good reason to try to get the picture right in-camera, rather than depending on post processing to correct errors.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 1:41 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
thkn777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,831
Default

@bahadir

Thanks my friend, I was really astonished when things "developed" step by step in that direction and when I noticed the effect I was pushing even more until I felt I couldn't go any step further without desrtoying things

@mtngal

Thank you, glad to give some ideas

I've got two other art experiments, here's the first one: "snow globe". I'd love to see a more professional approach to this snow globe theme... there is potential in this, as well as in the next one...
Attached Images
 
thkn777 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 4:21 AM.