philip_pj wrote:
(OK, time to try out the new layout)
Bokeh is one of the hardest things and you could stop right there, but I'll add what I look for in bokeh for most portraits. Besides the has-to-be-interesting and exposure/ focus needs, I want the context surrounding the person, not always possible I know; and the person should look part of the scene.
Bokeh must welcome the viewer's eye inside the world of the image, so it has to be easy on the eye. I love lenses that simply present the background objects with a smooth softening - you see their distance (for 3D) and you see what is going on back there as objects are identifiable, with color and tonal ranges intact, and low contrast to take the edge of the digital CMOS look.
(wow, I like the new look, seeing the thumbnail is great) ...Show more →
Nothing is in focus in the first picture- I think you took what could have been a nice shot to have both ladies in focus and made the picture about what no one cares about, the background blur.
1bwana1 wrote:
Just for the sake of the discussion, no lense could have added as much to the shaping of this image as five minutes of dodging and burning. Just put them side by side and compare.
i'm sorry..what?
that's not dodging and burning; that's literally applying a new light source that wasn't there. was this edited with AI with a prompt "add side lighting on camera right and reflector on camera left"?
1bwana1 wrote:
Just for the sake of the discussion, no lense could have added as much to the shaping of this image as five minutes of dodging and burning. Just put them side by side and compare.
In the altered version, I think that what you have done to the central figure makes a lot of sense and generally improves her appearance. (Might be a bit hot in a few areas, but it is just meant as an example, I assume.)
For fun, you could also try differentiating a bit more between her and the background. It looks like when you post-processed her you also increased the brightness and perhaps saturation of that background, too. I haven’t tried it with this image, but I’d consider separating her from the background using a mask and letting the background be a bit darker (at least taming the highlights a bit) and perhaps (though I’d have to actually try it to be sure) desaturating it a bit and even shifting the color there to be a bit cooler. (A quick trick is to just ass some vignetting, to, which also tends to strengthen the visual focus on the central area.)
that's not dodging and burning; that's literally applying a new light source that wasn't there. was this edited with AI with a prompt "add side lighting on camera right and reflector on camera left"?
Ansel Adams will not approve.
Here are a couple of Adams direct quotes for you to think about.
“Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships.”
“In the darkroom, I can experiment, enhance, embellish.”
Adams also often wrote about his view that photography is a creative art, not merely a means of communicating reality. This entitled him to complete freedom in the darkroom.
He absolutely added light in many of his images. In Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico the entire city was in shadow in the negative. In the finished print it was bathed in light that Adams added.
Yes, I created the effects of three strobes that were not there. But my example was not made to suggest a proper way to edit. It was only to show that in my opinion the impact of light has a bigger potential in creating depth in an image . Possibly more that the impact of the different lenses being discussed.
No lens would have added more perception of depth to that flat lit images as adding light did. That was the point, nothing more.
gdanmitchell wrote:
In the altered version, I think that what you have done to the central figure makes a lot of sense and generally improves her appearance. (Might be a bit hot in a few areas, but it is just meant as an example, I assume.)
For fun, you could also try differentiating a bit more between her and the background. It looks like when you post-processed her you also increased the brightness and perhaps saturation of that background, too. I haven’t tried it with this image, but I’d consider separating her from the background using a mask and letting the background be a bit darker (at least taming the highlights a bit) and perhaps (though I’d have to actually try it to be sure) desaturating it a bit and even shifting the color there to be a bit cooler. (A quick trick is to just ass some vignetting, to, which also tends to strengthen the visual focus on the central area.)...Show more →
As I have said, I was not trying to improve the image. What I did was cude and low effort. It only demonstrated the power of light in creating a 3D effect in a 2D medium.
1bwana1 wrote:
>> Just for the sake of the discussion, no lense could have added as much to the shaping of this image as five minutes of dodging and burning
> that's not dodging and burning; that's literally applying a new light source that wasn't there. was this edited with AI with a prompt "add side lighting on camera right and reflector on camera left"?
Yes, I created the effects of three strobes that were not there. But my example was not made to suggest a proper way to edit. It was only to show that in my opinion the impact of light has a bigger potential in creating depth in an image . Possibly more that the impact of the different lenses being discussed....Show more →
So you said dodging and burning, but you did not show dodging and burning?
Daran wrote:
So you said dodging and burning, but you did not show dodging and burning?
Here is the definition of Dodging and Burning. It is exactly what I did, and exactly what I showed.
You will notice that it specifically states it is used to create the appearance of depth in an image which is also exactly my intent.
You will also notice that it doesn't depend on a specific tool or method being used.
"In the digital darkroom, dodging and burning are selective editing techniques used to control the brightness of specific areas of a photograph without changing the entire image.
The terms come directly from traditional photographic darkroom printing, as practiced by Ansel Adams.
The two techniques
DODGING
Lighten
- Increases the brightness of selected areas.
- Reveals detail in dark shadows.
- Draws attention to important subjects.
- Creates the appearance of additional illumination. (I specifically did this as I said)
BURNING
Darken
- Decreases the brightness of selected areas.
- Adds depth and contrast. (My specific intent)
- Controls distracting highlights.
- Creates stronger shadows and visual emphasis."
1bwana1 wrote:
The terms come directly from traditional photographic darkroom printing, as practiced by Ansel Adams.
The two techniques
DODGING
Lighten
- Increases the brightness of selected areas.
- Reveals detail in dark shadows.
- Draws attention to important subjects.
- Creates the appearance of additional illumination. (I specifically did this as I said)
BURNING
Darken
- Decreases the brightness of selected areas.
- Adds depth and contrast. (My specific intent)
- Controls distracting highlights.
- Creates stronger shadows and visual emphasis."
How did I not Dodge and Burn?
Because it’s blindingly obvious that significant alterations have been made here—most likely using AI. For one thing, the background has been completely changed; it’s not just a matter of adding a few highlights—the entire composition of the background has been overhauled, to the point where what’s visible now bears no resemblance to the original image. Furthermore, the scale of the person in relation to the background has been altered. The whole thing is a botched job that has only made matters worse, and it also comes across as looking completely and artificially manipulated.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Because it’s blindingly obvious that significant alterations have been made here—most likely using AI. For one thing, the background has been completely changed; it’s not just a matter of adding a few highlights—the entire composition of the background has been overhauled, to the point where what’s visible now bears no resemblance to the original image. Furthermore, the scale of the person in relation to the background has been altered. The whole thing is a botched job that has only made matters worse, and it also comes across as looking completely and artificially manipulated.
1bwana1 wrote:
Happy to read that you enjoyed the image.
Well, frankly, it’s an absolute cheek to claim that you only used dodging and burning—when it’s patently obvious that this is a lie, to call a spade a spade. The fact that I don’t like the result is, in this context, rather beside the point. I can really only imagine one scenario that would lead to such an outcome while you still somehow convince yourself that you only applied dodging and burning: perhaps you uploaded the image to an AI and asked it to dodge and burn, but the AI—unfortunately—ended up doing significantly(!) more than that.
