Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: armand on April 04, 2011, 09:11:11 pm
-
3 years old
-
You've seen the sci-fi movies where they open a door to a blinding, gaping light, or better still into a huge universe in front of them? That's what this reminds me of.
That said, not wild about the huge, blown out areas. I do like the metaphor of being in two places; inside and outside.
-
She looks awfully grown up for a 3-year old! :o
-
She looks awfully grown up for a 3-year old! :o
The photo is 3 years old ;D Looks worse in jpeg than in LR3 but the idea is the same regardless.
-
It doesn't look believable that the outside is so bright but the walls inside have a lot of details unless of course there is a strong indoor light source. If you were to make the indoors darker it would be better. Possibly a good idea wrongly processed or shot.?
-
Interesting treatment; I'm sure it would find purpose in some sort of album cover work.
Believable? Then don't look at any fashion or lads' magazines.
Nothing is believable anymore, just watch the news progs and ask yourself with whom Reality is sleeping tonight.
Rob C
-
Rob to me it lacks good contrast. My preference is for good blacks and good whites unless there is good reason for having some well exposed midtones. This image doesn't have either, imo. 8)
-
I was not aiming for a "believable" shot. This was taken when getting out of a church. For the beginning one could see 2 interpretations: that she is "seeing the light" when getting out of the church (with few other subsequent interpretations, mainly iconoclastic), or that she is "seeing the light" because she was in the church in the first place. If I wanted to go with the first one, then making the shot "not believable" might add to it ;) .
Those being said, in all fairness to stamper, something went wrong during the export, I might have exported an earlier version, I'll try post another one later when I get home. In LR the final version has better contrast. However, these modifications will not change the idea which is what I was aiming for here, and not technical perfection.
-
For this type of effect to work well, I would say it requires a certain amount of glow around highlights (even more so for blown out highlights). The transition as it is is rather harsh.
But otherwise, I like the idea. You've come a long way since the iguana (and me suspecting you as a troll ;D)
-
But otherwise, I like the idea. You've come a long way since the iguana (and me suspecting you as a troll Grin)
Ha, the iguana is actually taken 1 year later. I had it printed large and that's why it didn't seem that flawed ;)
Here is another version, probably as good as I can get without going into Photoshop. I know technically could be better, but it was quite spontaneous, I had just one quick chance to get it. Probably in few years I'll be back and I will try a more planned shot. I guess you can try in any door (and probably I will), but it will miss a lot of the implications from using the church. If I could reduce the blown floor to half and no more I would be quite happy with it.
-
Here is another version, probably as good as I can get without going into Photoshop. I know technically could be better, but it was quite spontaneous, I had just one quick chance to get it. Probably in few years I'll be back and I will try a more planned shot. I guess you can try in any door (and probably I will), but it will miss a lot of the implications from using the church. If I could reduce the blown floor to half and no more I would be quite happy with it.
Much improved.
Jeremy
-
I disagree: it has now turned towards a conventional picture which isn't what I felt it to be about.
Artists must accept the challenge - perhaps necessity - of breaking established ground. Rules are fine for mundane topics, in fact I'd go as far as suggesting they are essential, but unless we also stick with our original and possibly 'difficult' feelings we get nowhere...
Anyway, spring has sprung and the birds shit upon the cars as usual.
Rob C
-
I disagree: it has now turned towards a conventional picture which isn't what I felt it to be about.
Artists must accept the challenge - perhaps necessity - of breaking established ground. Rules are fine for mundane topics, in fact I'd go as far as suggesting they are essential, but unless we also stick with our original and possibly 'difficult' feelings we get nowhere...
The poster - imo - didn't set out to break established ground. It was in fact a well established idea that many thought hadn't been properly executed. In this part of the forum you are judged by what you post and nobody knows your feelings about the image unless you tell them. :)
-
...Anyway, spring has sprung and the birds shit upon the cars as usual...
Rob, thanks for my first chuckle of the day!
-
The photos (and art in general) that I am the most happy with are the one that gather as many different opinions as possible. Usually it's not the case with the landscape photos though.
-
As I upgraded the PS I decided to finally use it. I don't know how I came up with the idea but I was able to get to this in a timely manner without doing it before. As a matter of fact I didn't do almost anything in Photoshop before.
Granted the technical aspects could be better but I am curious if you think the idea it improves the original shot.