Greg, I strive to keep taking my photography to the next level. For the most part I do in camera work, don't rely on photoshop to fix things. Although I do edit my photos, I don't usually spend much time in processing. When I use effects like in this photo, it is obvious.
Bill, No macro here, I thought you were only supposed to shoot bugs with a macro lense, according to the macro forum. And no, not the palm of my hand.
Greg, I strive to keep taking my photography to the next level. For the most part I do in camera work, don't rely on photoshop to fix things. Although I do edit my photos, I don't usually spend much time in processing. When I use effects like in this photo, it is obvious.
I'm glad you are so good with your camera you don't need photoshop....I would be lost without it (or at least Lightroom)!
Whether you are using "in camera" effects, or post processing effects, if you go to that much trouble to disguise the intent of a photo, I'm afraid many will miss it....
Y,
I truly enjoy the way you see the world around you. Every week I look forward to see what gem you will post. Keep up the excellent work and keep me guessing.
Jim
gregfountain wrote:
I'm glad you are so good with your camera you don't need photoshop....I would be lost without it (or at least Lightroom)!
Whether you are using "in camera" effects, or post processing effects, if you go to that much trouble to disguise the intent of a photo, I'm afraid many will miss it....
I can't wait for the reveal on this one!
Greg, I didn't say I was so good with my camera.......I leaned photography from the ground up over many years with film cameras.....not even auto focus. My main study of art and photography was abstract and impressionism. I am not running down post processing regardless of what program is used. None of us could live without it these days. Even with film, the processing was done when you dropped off your film to be processed and printed. I am pointing out that that is why my photos usually look different than most that you see today anywhere.
I would also like to point out that I have watched your photos improve by leaps and bounds as you learned more about lighting. You have been a great inspiration to many here. Just watching you work and change your photos out each week has taught many of us. You have just choosen a different genre than I have.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'in camera' effects, the way you stated that. If you mean the filters in my DSLR, ya they are fun to play with. However I still shoot on manual and have full control of each photo that I take without those filters.
Ummm not sure what you mean by disguise the intent of my photo. The intent of most of my work is abstract and impressionism.
You will be surprised what this actually is. I'll tell you next week.
kellermsu wrote:
Y,
I truly enjoy the way you see the world around you. Every week I look forward to see what gem you will post. Keep up the excellent work and keep me guessing.
Jim
Thanks Jim, very happy to hear you enjoy my photos. I guess the point is to keep people guessing.
I like it. I do like abstract stuff and this is a thought provoking subject. I have no idea how you did it though. It's cool not using photoshop though.
I have no idea what this is. But it's abstract, so that's a plus in my book. I like the color.
I've looked at this a few times and for quite a while now. While I do like it, there was something I didn't like that I couldn't put my finger on. I finally figured out what it was. I find the white border / framing distracting. I don't know why, but I do. Maybe it's just a little too "thick". Then again, maybe it's just me
TripleYYY wrote:
Greg, I didn't say I was so good with my camera.......I leaned photography from the ground up over many years with film cameras.....not even auto focus. My main study of art and photography was abstract and impressionism. I am not running down post processing regardless of what program is used. None of us could live without it these days. Even with film, the processing was done when you dropped off your film to be processed and printed. I am pointing out that that is why my photos usually look different than most that you see today anywhere.
I would also like to point out that I have watched your photos improve by leaps and bounds as you learned more about lighting. You have been a great inspiration to many here. Just watching you work and change your photos out each week has taught many of us. You have just choosen a different genre than I have.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'in camera' effects, the way you stated that. If you mean the filters in my DSLR, ya they are fun to play with. However I still shoot on manual and have full control of each photo that I take without those filters.
Ummm not sure what you mean by disguise the intent of my photo. The intent of most of my work is abstract and impressionism.
You will be surprised what this actually is. I'll tell you next week.
I think the problem with these discussion boards is the lack of "tone" when writing something. You said you don't rely on PP'ing, so what I said was more a shot at my own lack of skills with my camera and reliance on PP'ing to make corrections.
My comment on disguising your image was just a comment to your original post that no one would vote for it because you didn't make it obvious....I too try to take a different approach and sometimes those ideas creep up after I've already posted one...but the point is, I understand what you meant and was more or less just pointing out why it may be difficult for some to see what you are hoping they see...
mark fadely wrote:
I like it. I do like abstract stuff and this is a thought provoking subject. I have no idea how you did it though. It's cool not using photoshop though.
Hi Mark, I said I don't use much editing. I do have to edit some, I just don't spend a lot of time fixing photos. If I didn't capture what I was after in camera.......I reshoot or don't get the shot. However sometimes I play and add colour and vignettes or what ever like I did in this shot.
Aaron D wrote:
I have no idea what this is. But it's abstract, so that's a plus in my book. I like the color.
I've looked at this a few times and for quite a while now. While I do like it, there was something I didn't like that I couldn't put my finger on. I finally figured out what it was. I find the white border / framing distracting. I don't know why, but I do. Maybe it's just a little too "thick". Then again, maybe it's just me
Either way, creative and great job!
Thanks Aaron, I appreciate your comment. The vignette added depth to this, that is why I used it.
Greg, You are right, our tones don't alway come across. I see what you were saying now.
Okay, here is what this is.
This is the light comming through the corner of the mini blind on my back door. Slow shutter and camera movement. Added the colour and vignette to give more depth in post.
TripleYYY wrote:
Greg, You are right, our tones don't alway come across. I see what you were saying now.
Okay, here is what this is.
This is the light comming through the corner of the mini blind on my back door. Slow shutter and camera movement. Added the colour and vignette to give more depth in post.
Y
Well I've been trying to figure it out all week, but I'd never have guessed.
The intent of most of my work is abstract and impressionism.