Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: rocker  (Read 1755 times)

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
rocker
« on: August 11, 2012, 03:16:36 PM »

Is the sepia version clichéd? Does it look better in colour? Does it matter?

C&C, please.

Jeremy
Logged

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: rocker
« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2012, 03:26:45 PM »

Jeremy,

If you could get the same luminosity to the timber of the chair in the sepia as you have in the colour I think it would be marvellous.  And I'd knock back the strength of the highlights on the floor boards and carpet.

Logged

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1045
    • pbase galleries
Re: rocker
« Reply #2 on: August 11, 2012, 04:21:14 PM »

I like the sepia version better, though, as usual for me, I tend to wonder if less red and more black would be better.  In the color version I can't figure out the space; it doesn't look real to me.  I like the room going dark to the right in the sepia.

Bruce
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 9550
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: rocker
« Reply #3 on: August 11, 2012, 06:14:51 PM »

Jeremy, If you can re-shoot this quite interesting shot, I'd suggest going back and doing a three to five shot HDR spread. What bothers me, as it does Walter, are the blowouts on the floor and the little rug. If you do an HDR run, be very careful with the tone mapping because it'll be too easy to raise the tones in the background, and you don't want to get them much higher than they are in these versions. I agree with Walter about the luminosity in the chair timber. Not sure you can get the same luminosity in the sepia version, but with HDR, maybe.

Yes, it matters. It always matters.

wolfnowl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5821
    • M&M's Musings
Re: rocker
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2012, 01:06:37 AM »

An HDR image would be good here.  I do like the sepia, though!

Mike.
Logged
If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~

My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
Re: rocker
« Reply #5 on: August 12, 2012, 02:38:26 AM »

Jeremy, If you can re-shoot this quite interesting shot, I'd suggest going back and doing a three to five shot HDR spread. What bothers me, as it does Walter, are the blowouts on the floor and the little rug. If you do an HDR run, be very careful with the tone mapping because it'll be too easy to raise the tones in the background, and you don't want to get them much higher than they are in these versions. I agree with Walter about the luminosity in the chair timber. Not sure you can get the same luminosity in the sepia version, but with HDR, maybe.

Yes, it matters. It always matters.

Thanks, all.

Sadly, Russ, it was a one-off. I arrived at a place in France to find that the owners had lit a fire and the wind had filled the house with smoke. I don't think they'd like me to re-create it! If I'd known then what I've learned now (mostly from this site), I'd have bracketed, but I was young(er) and even more ignorant.

I took the shot about seven years ago with my 20D and returned to it recently to see if LR4 could do a better job of processing it (which it duly did). I'll spend a little more time and see if I can improve the result, particularly the sepia version.

Jeremy
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16846
Re: rocker
« Reply #6 on: August 12, 2012, 04:40:10 AM »

Jeremy

For my tastes, it's a great found image but not in the colours/tones you chose for it: I would reduce it all to black/white and spend time bringing that to the best that I could. Of course, that opinion comes from a long-established bias against messing about/up with Kodak's WSG 2 papers that were, in my view, far, far better than most photographers could utilise; sepia was also an obligatory technique at night school and that did it no favours. To me, these 'tricks' are the paint on a whore. You don't need them at all, the worst possible way to waddle in nostalgia. Setting up a shot à la old-fashioned is one thing...

FWIW, I believe that taking away bits and pieces from these 'found' situations only serves to weaken them; it's okay if you are creating from a blank canvas, but when something just grabs you, then it's pretty much got it right by itself.

Anyway, you clearly know what you're looking for; get back to France soon and enjoy.

Rob C

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
Re: rocker
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2012, 03:43:46 AM »

Suppose I want to fiddle with the blown areas in the carpet, and I could use the unblown carpet to the right as a clone source. Could a PS guru (I think there are a couple around here) suggest how I should go about it? I envisage some sort of blending from another layer, but I'm pretty clueless about this kind of manipulation.

Jeremy
Logged

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8927
Re: rocker
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2012, 04:20:50 AM »

Suppose I want to fiddle with the blown areas in the carpet, and I could use the unblown carpet to the right as a clone source. Could a PS guru (I think there are a couple around here) suggest how I should go about it? I envisage some sort of blending from another layer, but I'm pretty clueless about this kind of manipulation.

Jeremy

I tried a few things but it's hard to get a natural look. I'm sure that very experienced PS users can save the blown areas but with my limited skills, leaving them as they are is a better solution.
Logged
Francois

RobbieV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
    • My work.
Re: rocker
« Reply #9 on: August 13, 2012, 08:43:23 AM »

It's a lovely picture with a definite feeling to it (unlike a snapshot). However, I am going to go against the grain and suggest that the over-exposed floor works well with the picture. Perhaps gaining a bit more detail would be nice, but I enjoy the look of the floor as such.

It reminds me of that special angle you sometimes see light hitting, bouncing or reflecting off of objects. That moment where you line up all the angles unconsciously and look and precisely the right time to catch a glimpse of the glint.

Often it takes your mind off in tangents away from reality, and for that reason I prefer the sepia.
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13588
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: rocker
« Reply #10 on: August 13, 2012, 05:29:43 PM »

Maybe I spent too many years in the film darkroom world, but the blownout areas on the floor don't bother me here at all.
It's a fine image, Jeremy. Accept it for what it is.

Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes    (A sampler of my new book is on my website.)
http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website (Server is back up). New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1345
  • The Earth without Art is just Eh
Re: rocker
« Reply #11 on: August 13, 2012, 07:22:11 PM »

Suppose I want to fiddle with the blown areas in the carpet, and I could use the unblown carpet to the right as a clone source. Could a PS guru (I think there are a couple around here) suggest how I should go about it? I envisage some sort of blending from another layer, but I'm pretty clueless about this kind of manipulation.

Jeremy

OK, I'll bite..

Create a new empty layer, sample the carpet colour and paint that over the blown out area, but on the new layer and make sure you have covered it all as best you can. Don't worry about trying to get the colour only on the white bit, just make sure you cover it all. Now run a Gaussian blur on this new layer, experiment with what seems to work best, this will diffuse the edge overlaps and blend it in a little. Now try different layer blending options to find one that works best, you will also probably need to back off on the layer opacity to help the blend work. You might then also then need to clone a bit of detail across on to it - but remember, you are trying to reduce the blown out white effect, not remove it entirely, that way it will still look real.

Watch this video, which I know is for blown out flash, but is near enough similar and will give you some more ideas of what you may be able to do to save your shot.

Dave
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 07:35:35 PM by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
Logged

RobbieV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
    • My work.
Re: rocker
« Reply #12 on: August 14, 2012, 11:18:46 AM »

Here's another good good way to remove hot spots using calculations. Substitute the clone tool for the spot healing brush though.

http://www.sproutphotography.co.uk/blog/2010/04/26/removing-flash-hot-spots-photoshop-tutorial/
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: rocker
« Reply #13 on: August 14, 2012, 11:23:17 AM »

Love the image, and for it to be a found photo makes it even more memorable.

Is there anything to the left of the window? To me, it seems too tight up against the left margin.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com.
Flickr Account;
PhotoBlog – Read and subscribe!

kikashi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
Re: rocker
« Reply #14 on: August 14, 2012, 02:06:06 PM »

Thanks for the tips. I'll give them a try, just to see.

Love the image, and for it to be a found photo makes it even more memorable.

Is there anything to the left of the window? To me, it seems too tight up against the left margin.

I know what you mean. In this shot, no. In others (no better exposed, sadly), a rather unattractive metal-framed bunk bed with a yellow bedcover. Nothing that improved the view in any way.

Jeremy
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up