Jump to content
When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
  • Current Donation Goals

You Think Neil Has Photoskills? Then Take A Look At Those Shots


slay

Recommended Posts

Good photos... but not even close to Neil's best stuff. Actually lots of our members can shoot pics in this quality. Bazz, Puggy and many others have shot just as good PAM shots.

PS: The blue lume pics are 10 seconds Photoshop jobs. I can do that too.

136584-18087.jpg

More "artsy Photoshop junk":

136584-18088.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

still your blue pics are in no way close to that dudes pics ;)

to me that guys pics look better than neils. neils look a little bit too synthetic/artificial to me, like sometimes in watch ads when you dont know if its the actual watch or a computer made image. but thats just my humble opinion. I prefer pictures without all the fancy photoshop tricks such as removing the reflections and all that kind of stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

still your blue pics are in no way close to that dudes pics ;)

That wasn't my point... they weren't supposed to be anything special. Those original lume pics I took are straight out of a $100 camera, shot without any decent equipment or setup. My point was that doing Photoshop tricks like this isn't impressive at all (imho). It might look nice (and sometimes it's nice to play with it)... but it has nothing to do with "picture taking skills".

to me that guys pics look better than neils. neils look a little bit too synthetic/artificial to me, like sometimes in watch ads when you dont know if its the actual watch or a computer made image. but thats just my humble opinion. I prefer pictures without all the fancy photoshop tricks such as removing the reflections and all that kind of stuff.

Yeah. It's a taste thing. I didn't think those pictures were anything special. Some of them were technically pretty poor, even. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

This is what I call impressive pic:

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/9944/001sublv16610we3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slay mentioned that he doesn't like Photoshopped pics but those pics he linked were definitely Photoshopped heavily (overcontrasted).

I shoot pics in natural lighting... usually outside. And often even without light box (using different kind of reflector cards). The pics might not look "impressive" or make anyone go "ooh, aah"... but they're realistic and are kinda pics that I like. For me it's not any kind of competition, either. This kind of pics...which show the watch in natural lighting... are (imho) best for the reviews... and serve the readers best.

136596-18081.jpg

136596-18082.jpg

136596-18083.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry....I don't agree on the technique side of the photographs......I could do those shots all day long....shoot in harsh light to creat the specular highlights....Photoshop them heavily......a little reflection here and there.....bingo......!

But everybody'd tatse is different when it comes to 'art'......when I post something here....I'm not concerned with 'art"...the difference between his photos and mine is that I shoot mine in order to provide the best reference photos for selling a watch......not for being 'arty'......!

neils look a little bit too synthetic/artificial to me, like sometimes in watch ads when you dont know if its the actual watch or a computer made image.

Thank you for compliment......if my pics look like magazine shots....that's what I aim for...on the other hand if my photos look like computer generated images....then I'm doing something that even the best studios aren't doing.....producing CGI without a computer.......virtually ALL my work is done in camera.......I don't use Photoshop to dial out reflections.......I manipulate light to do that........the only Photoshop I use is to perhaps increase contrast / sharpness / white balance and for 'spotting' purposes....( it's virtually impossible to keep a watch clean).....so I use P/shop.......to remove any dust or fingerprints that has adhered to the glass / case / bracelet.....but that isn't cheating.....!

Here's a number of examples.......specifically shot for sales purposes.....oh....and thank you for the opportunity to show some photographs again.....I'm just a shameless publicity hag......:lol:

136670-18045.jpg

136670-18046.jpg

136670-18047.jpg

136670-18048.jpg

136670-18049.jpg

136670-18050.jpg

136670-18051.jpg

136670-18052.jpg

136670-18053.jpg

136670-18054.jpg

136670-18055.jpg

136670-18056.jpg

136670-18057.jpg

136670-18058.jpg

136670-18059.jpg

136670-18060.jpg

136670-18061.jpg

136670-18062.jpg

But then again....if you want Photoshopped....I can do that as well.... :D

136670-18063.jpg

136670-18064.jpg

Edited by TTK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Deve....yes that's a Photoshop manipulated image.....but that's one of my genuine watches....and would never be put up for sale on this board......I took the opportunity to be a little 'arty' with my Ebel.

The point I was emphasising was that ANY replica watch that I put up for sale here.....is NOT heavily Photoshopped........you only have to look at the Exif data to see the level of Photoshop I use.....not a great deal.....!

BTW....it's 'flare'.....altho' I think I exercised a little flair when doing it....same as these...which are P'shopped......but would NEVER be put up as representative of the item for sale!

136673-18042.jpg

136673-18043.jpg

136673-18044.jpg

Edited by TTK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bravo Neil... :thumbsupsmileyanim:

I think your shots suit their purpose perfectly, it's a completely different application.

Technical photography compared to 'art' photography is like comparing oranges and elephants, you just can't do it.

Those shots the guy made on the other forum are nice and artsy, but I'd probably never buy a watch from them, the exact inverse applies to Neil's shots, except sometimes they're just too good :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with most people here, Slay..

Those pics are nothing special to me.. I am no expert, but I am in a learning process.

The reflections in his pics look burned out, over exposed. The dark areas and the dark pics look like they are under exposed, and he's tried to brighten them in PS. He's shooting with whitebalance in automode, that's rarely a good thing, and not in his case anyway. (I checked this model out when I was buying a new camera, and several reviews stated "very average automatic white balance performance")

He's using a Canon EOS 300D DIGITAL, so he's got an "entry level" SLR, and lots of settings to tinker with.

I also think he crops the photos too close, cutting off parts you'd normally want to see.

I myself don't bother too much with my pics, I have a camera like Pugwash', but I do not have his skills nor interest. I get a lucky keeper shot of my baby girl now and then, when she decides to stand still for a split second.

Our Panasonic FZs are inexpensive cameras and Pugwash gets a LOT out of it.

I'm more of a fan of direct-from-camera pics rather than the ones that's had 'artistic' manipulation in PS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Puggy......it's fun isn't it......only thing is I get bored with reps.....I'm headed home to Scotland in late November....I'll be picking up some new genuines...( hopefully an AP T3 )........and looking forward to photographing them...!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Puggy......it's fun isn't it......only thing is I get bored with reps.....I'm headed home to Scotland in late November....I'll be picking up some new genuines...( hopefully an AP T3 )........and looking forward to photographing them...!

Nice one. I can't wait to see the pics. :D

I presume you'll be back in Thailand for Xmas/New Year though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes...I'm just going home to be Santa......and sort out some more business......I've got masses of electronic gear that I need to get shot of....scanners.....UHF/VHF transmitters...laser listeners......hi-fi gear.....DVD's and Laserdiscs to pack over here....too much all at once.......need to do it in stages....:D!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes...I'm just going home to be Santa......and sort out some more business......I've got masses of electronic gear that I need to get shot of....scanners.....UHF/VHF transmitters...laser listeners......hi-fi gear.....DVD's and Laserdiscs to pack over here....too much all at once.......need to do it in stages....:D!

qrz?

You a radio ham, Neil?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up