ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Just trying something different for me. Sometimes I think the granite top gets a bit too busy with my images, so I thought I would simplify a bit. Tweaked these a bit in PS... Thoughts? Comments? (Please don't mind the empty carcass in the background... Movement is off at the spa for overhaul...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Nice!! The third one from the top is my fave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KB Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I like very much Randy these pic's are all about the watches, there's a heck of a lot of distraction with the granite top. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Tracy Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I'm partial to number two,.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 It's been said before, but I'm not a fan of the torchlight filter. I know Shutterbug, By-Tor and now you all use it but to me it's as bad as fake lens flare. Sorry. I think Photoshop should be used to make the photos closer to what we see, or to enhance it, and in that respect you're doing just that, but for some reason it doesn't work for me. Don't stop using it on my behalf as the reactions you'll get are mostly positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Thanks for your honest comments, Pug. The pics are just experimentation; no plans on using the lighting filter for my regular pics. However, I do think that if done right, the filter could have a nice effect on images; I'm just not patient or experienced enough with PS to do it correctly. I did, however, play around with image #3, and make a file that I might use for my sig.... Thanks for the kind words, guys! As I said prior... Comments, criticism, etc. all welcome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devedander Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 (edited) Sorry, gonna have to say I don't like them... the filter looks over or poorly applied... just not right somehow. In all but the first the filter looks over or wrongly applied and hurts contrast and really messes with the picture around the edges. It almost hurts my eyes (like those T shirts where the writing is blurred and says something like "too much masturbation makes things look blurry"). Overall I feel like you just hurt contrast and detract from the subject with obvious post prcoessing without helping the presentation and the only thing that gets accented is that something was done to the picture, not the subject. If it was supposed to be a dream sequence or blackout flashback scene in a movie where you are trying to convey a sense of not quite being able to see right and or discomfort with the scene, then I would say they work, but other than that... not my taste. I am much more impressed by your less processed shots. No offense or anything personal, I assume you put these up for some fair evaluation. BTW there is a beta of CS3 out there... I haven't played with it much but it looks interesting! Edited December 16, 2006 by Devedander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 BTW there is a beta of CS3 out there... I haven't played with it much but it looks interesting! Only worth trying out if you're on an Intel Mac, to be honest. It'll be great when it's finished though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Thanks for your honest comments, Pug. You'll be glad to know I'm in the minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 You'll be glad to know I'm in the minority. Well... My experience in PS is apparent. To date, I've only used PS for auto levels and adjusting. I'll stick to building frankens... Shooting pics is quite the pain in the ass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvt Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Not to pile on but I must agree with what some of the others have said, the filters are too heavy handed and draw more attention to themselves than to the watches you are showcasing. I happen to be a photographer as a profosion (I do not think I am alone in that here) and I often find that amatures grossly over aply PS filers. It is fun and cool and all but rarely helps the images and more often than not just distracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I'll stick to building frankens... Shooting pics is quite the pain in the ass Tell you what, you do more pics and I'll do a Franken, ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Tell you what, you do more pics and I'll do a Franken, ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryyannon Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I think those pics look just great! Reminds me a bit of the classic Harcourt Studio style of the 1930s - 1950s.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 How's this? Better? I just get so bored with the granite... *sigh* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I think those pics look just great! Reminds me a bit of the classic Harcourt Studio style of the 1930s - 1950s.... wow.. tough crowd... i think the pics look great, but to call me a rank amateur is to insult rank amteurs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devedander Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 (edited) How's this? Better? I just get so bored with the granite... *sigh* Still not hot on it... the eye gets drawn to then almost blinded by the highlight. The rest of the picture still has a flat washed out feel... contrast is hurt and used up on the highlight. White crush is not being nice to you here. The reflection in the granite is also just wrong somehow and is exagerated by the contrast problem. Maybe reduce/remove the reflection in the granite and bump the contrast on the rest of the pic might help. Edited December 16, 2006 by Devedander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Man, there is no pleasing some of you guys Tell you what. Why don't YOU show me how it's done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Here's the original... feel free to go to town. Meanwhile, I'm off to go fight the crowds at the mall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Man, there is no pleasing some of you guys Tell you what. Why don't YOU show me how it's done? Nah the originals looked good. There are a variety of pleasing effects that can be created in photoshop. I like the vignetting that draws the eye to the subject. For still life macro work it can be very effective. While I may have feathered more or done this or done that, overall I think Ubi's images looked good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devedander Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 (edited) Hey, I didn't mean for you to take it personally... just saying I didn't like that particular one... I prsonally think some of your others are great, your sig right now is one of my favorites. No hard feelings? That said seeing the original shows me where a lot of the problem comes from... the glare in the original is the source of the problem. It would take quite a while to get rid of that glare properly, but I did my best to bump the other highlights a bit and soften it so that it doesn't draw so much to that area... this is still very heavily processed but more what I tend towards which is less attention to the processing and more to the featured subject This one is reworked from your original: What was done: Reflection removed from granite Contrast and brightness balanced a bit Colors adjusted Light bloom added/enhanced Softened Dial contrast/saturation adjusted Watch isolated and desaturated Colors and contrast balanced again after retouching to maintain high contrast (and offset the brightness of the highlight) Before and after BTW did you white balance your camera before taking that shot? It seems very warm... Also I looked at your original shots in this thread and isolated what catches my eye as being so wrong... your torche light filter doesn't match the highlights/shadows of the watches... they seem to be multi point lit and lit from farther than the torch would have to be to create that effect IRL... That said I am in no form of delusion about my rank amature status and tip my hat to those here who have far more talent in photography than I do (as I said Ubi, some of your pictures are VERY impressive... I am just not feeling it with your processed ones... maybe it's like guilding the lilly you know?) Edited December 16, 2006 by Devedander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Working on a low-res JPEG is never going to give perfect results, but I decided to give it a go. What's been done? A little sharpening, masking, blurring, lightening, darkening, colourising, levels-palleting, etc. I'd forgotten how tough laptop trackpads were for photoshop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted December 16, 2006 Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 Working on a low-res JPEG is never going to give perfect results, but I decided to give it a go. What's been done? A little sharpening, masking, blurring, lightening, darkening, etc. I'd forgotten how tough laptop trackpads were for photoshop. wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted December 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Take it personally? Nah... Maybe you didn't see my smiley. But... I do like to see folks who critique back up what they're commenting on. It's one thing to talk the talk... But another to walk the line... But definitely no hard feelings! I asked for thoughts, comments, etc. I respect honesty; that way I know what I need to improve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 I think the pic Puggy corrected looks a bit unnatural. In his corrected pic the dial reflects green and rich yellow, while the bracelet and bezel simultaneously heavily reflect red and magenta (which is the initial problem of this pic). If you start desaturating you have to remove all reflected saturated light from the whole surface (imho). Dave's picture has the same problem as the original... but instead of being too red it's now too green. My pic changes look unnatural as well... because the surrounding granite still has too much red and magenta (due to camera's white balance being off... and lack of light), but more pleasing to my eye. I just quickly desaturated the bracelet and bezel completely, which makes the surfaces grainy... and they look out of place compared to red granite and the dial which now has almost natural colors. So this is one of those "artsy" pics, eh? If you need to start desaturating the pics heavily it isn't good. If you have to do this you have a problem with your lighting and/or white balance. But generally... who is to say what's right and wrong in someone's pictures? That's why having these debates are sometimes annoying. It's in the eye of the beholder. But these discussions can be fruitful too... everyone can get good ideas from others. PS: Ubi... your pics are very good. I would just experiment with more light, and some kind of transparent surface to diffuse the lighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.