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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 22, 2010, 2:54 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
maggo85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arzl im Pitztal/Austria/Europe
Posts: 1,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schent1 View Post
The HDR by maggo85 is nice, but what is the problem with the child that everyone is talking about?
Didn't have the time to clone it out

Now you just have to remove the arm (or whatever it is) on the right side in the pic is perfect... of course the original one from Kevin has the most realistic look as Dave (Chato) wrote.
__________________
Markus Rimml Photography | Facebook | Twitter

2 x EOS 6D | 24/1.4 ART | 35/1.4 ART | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2L
maggo85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2010, 9:15 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maggo85 View Post
Didn't have the time to clone it out

Now you just have to remove the arm (or whatever it is) on the right side in the pic is perfect... of course the original one from Kevin has the most realistic look as Dave (Chato) wrote.
It's not just a case for realism. The original had a "spiritual" look to it, that is lost completely in the later versions. Nor is this a case of HDR vs normal - I prefer the original from any point of view. The spirituality could probably be kept with an HDR version, but subdued, subdued. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2010, 9:40 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
maggo85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arzl im Pitztal/Austria/Europe
Posts: 1,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chato View Post
It's not just a case for realism. The original had a "spiritual" look to it, that is lost completely in the later versions. Nor is this a case of HDR vs normal - I prefer the original from any point of view. The spirituality could probably be kept with an HDR version, but subdued, subdued. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.

Dave
I totally agree with you Dave - I just saw this shot and wanted to know how it would look like after running it through DPHDR

So in this case, I would leave the shot as it is, maybe just some slight pp (maybe)... just wanted to show what you can do if you want to play around
__________________
Markus Rimml Photography | Facebook | Twitter

2 x EOS 6D | 24/1.4 ART | 35/1.4 ART | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2L
maggo85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2010, 9:51 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maggo85 View Post
I totally agree with you Dave - I just saw this shot and wanted to know how it would look like after running it through DPHDR

So in this case, I would leave the shot as it is, maybe just some slight pp (maybe)... just wanted to show what you can do if you want to play around
As Bahadir has shown on another thread, it IS possible to use HDR and have a result with little or no contrast, and without a direct light source. For all I know such a technique would work well with this shot.

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2010, 6:06 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

Shadow/highlight and some gamma shift.
Attached Images
 
Bynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2010, 7:15 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Shadow/highlight and some gamma shift.
I'm hard pressed to give a response. Nice work. Is is better just because you got rid of the little girl? Or is it just plain better?

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2010, 3:33 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fredrikstad - Norway / Europe
Posts: 1,954
Default

Quite interesting to watch this thread, as it gives some indication of how we humans react to different views of the same picture, and how we defend our own 'state of mind' when it comes to the perception of a two-dimensional picture.

- First of all, Kevins edit in the first post, edit # 1 - which we have to accept as being the 'original'-one, as he is the only one who has been there.
While the lighted strip of the middle of the floor towards the window in the rear is reasonable sharp (?), the blurred girl on the right, together with the low-contrast edit of the rest of the picture, gives me an impression of something 'spiritual' (because it is a church?) and at the same time something - seen with the eye of a photographer - not yet quite finnished pp.


- Then there is Hards80's #2-edit in mono: very much different from edit # 1. It has more contrast and all the values of B&W, giving the eye lots of detail to look at. A work of art, compared to # 1

- Then along comes maggo85 and does edit # 3 with a 'pseudo-HDR'-approach, giving the same picture another dimension again! This time it is a cross between Hard's # 2 and Kevin's # 1 - but with a different mood. I like it a lot! It is more 'direct' in its appeal than # 1.

- The last edit - so far, is Bynx'es # 4 with shadow/highlight and Gamma-shift. To me, this is the closest yet, to how I would imagine (remember, I was never there) the scene could look like. There is still the 'spirituality' of the perishable 'holyness', plus some more reality to look at.
But it is all a matter of believability and how we all picture realism inside ourselfs. Just how our personalities handles the perception of what is "reality" and what is "artistry".

- Then there is Chato, forever "fighting the windmills" of his own belives. Being torn between 'realism' in post #12 and 'spirituality' in post #9. In my dictionary those two properties are quite different and not possible to combine in one picture - is it?


Quite interesting, as I said, because there is no certainty of what's the 'best'. The 'best' being inside our heads and not on paper or on the screen. Ask a thousand people and you will get a thousand-and-one answers back. And there is more to come, I am sure.

I am not trying to give an answer here, merely asking some more questions.
Walter_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2010, 6:47 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter_S View Post
I am not trying to give an answer here, merely asking some more questions.
This is a very interesting post Walter. Let me give you a "history" of my reactions. Here we have this building, and in Kevns first post it's described as a "Church." This set my view of the scene.

"It's a Church, it's spiritual, Man, it sure looks Spiritual to me. Great job."

Then I see a series of high contrast remakes

"This ain't right, it's this spiritual Church, what are these guys thinking?"

What if Kevin had said, "Here are some ruins of a Roman palace I saw?"

Finally Bynx does a remake that retains the "spiritual" look. Nice work, but I wonder if it's sooooo improved because of the nice work or the removal of the little girl?

My eye is seeing what my mind is Telling it to see.

Dave
Chato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2010, 7:12 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Fredrikstad - Norway / Europe
Posts: 1,954
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chato View Post
...What if Kevin had said, "Here are some ruins of a Roman palace I saw?"
I know what I would see (or rather my degenerated inner eyes), Chato!

Debauchery and orgy-like feasts with excessive indulgence in intimacy and other pleasures and endless drunken revelry of feasts with crazy food-stuff like fried nightingale-tongues and other baccanal and drunken orgys and lewdness of the worst kind - maybe....?

Ohh, my. I have to do something about my imagination.......it's getting too vivid!!



..?
Walter_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2010, 7:39 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

Santa Claus and tiny elves involved in drunken orgies. Oh what has the world come to? Or rather where has it come from?
Looking at that floor makes me wonder if, at one time, when it was new, if it was smooth and shiny like a big solid piece of glass. And since then has broken into those smaller pieces. Not taking into account the actual pattern in the stone.

Last edited by Bynx; Mar 23, 2010 at 7:48 AM.
Bynx 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 10:54 AM.