Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Edited Sky  (Read 7361 times)

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« on: December 11, 2005, 01:44:52 PM »

:) [attachment=54:attachment]The sky is edited.  Does it look natural?
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10695
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Edited Sky
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2005, 02:30:15 PM »

Quote
[attachment=54:attachment]The sky is edited.  Does it look natural?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53242\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
To me your sky looks quite plausible. It's a nice picture. IMHO you can get away with more manipulation in B&W than in color. Some of Ansel Adams' skies look less believable than yours. Just my vote.

Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2005, 04:04:28 PM »

Quote
To me your sky looks quite plausible. It's a nice picture. IMHO you can get away with more manipulation in B&W than in color. Some of Ansel Adams' skies look less believable than yours. Just my vote.

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53243\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here are two more.  i hope the light is consistant.
Logged

Lisa Nikodym

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1706
    • http://www.stanford.edu/~melkor/lisa_pictures/lisa_pictures.html
Edited Sky
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2005, 01:12:24 PM »

They look fine to me.  However, to say for certain, one would need to see a close-up of a print or high-res file; in my experience, it can be difficult to get the transition boundaries looking quite right, and that wouldn't be apparent in a small web image.  Other than that caveat, I wouldn't have guessed there was any extreme editing going on.

Lisa

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2005, 01:27:28 PM »

Quote
They look fine to me.  However, to say for certain, one would need to see a close-up of a print or high-res file; in my experience, it can be difficult to get the transition boundaries looking quite right, and that wouldn't be apparent in a small web image.  Other than that caveat, I wouldn't have guessed there was any extreme editing going on.

Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53338\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2005, 01:35:35 PM »

Thanks for the comments.  Note I am not trying to "fool" anyone, just adding some drama to an otherwise ordinary color picture.  I like to name my pictures after the location they were taken (in this case Rye, NH) and I am concerned about the ethics of this if the sky came from another location. I guess a  generic name like "Gathering  Storm" or some such thing would be OK.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
Edited Sky
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2005, 02:17:36 PM »

There's nothing wrong with compositing images intended as purely artistic, as long as you're not deceptive about the techniques used. If the image was intended for a newspaper story or trial evidence it wouldn't be appropriate, but art is whatever you want it to be.

macgyver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
Edited Sky
« Reply #7 on: December 12, 2005, 03:06:17 PM »

The skies look  natural, its the ground tthat looks crazy to me.  Crazy in a good way though.  I like it, they  have somewhat of a sureal cast to them.
Logged

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #8 on: December 12, 2005, 04:25:37 PM »

Quote
The skies look  natural, its the ground tthat looks crazy to me.  Crazy in a good way though.  I like it, they  have somewhat of a sureal cast to them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53359\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That may have more to do with the color-black to white conversion methods (we use about four of them) than any intent on our part.  Some have a grainy look which I also like.  I think also that this set was taken with a Canon Pro 1 at ISO 400.  The noise in these may contribute to the lsurreal look you observed.
Logged

Goldilocks

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 88
    • http://
Edited Sky
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2005, 03:34:24 AM »

I like the contrast of the hardness of the rocks and the softness of the clouds. The clouds look like they are slowly moving. Either that's artistic realism or I'm staying up to late on this website.
Logged

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2005, 08:57:05 AM »

Quote
I like the contrast of the hardness of the rocks and the softness of the clouds. The clouds look like they are slowly moving. Either that's artistic realism or I'm staying up to late on this website.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53427\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

One of the originals is enclosed (if I did this correctly).  In the modification we attempted to show the harmonious relationship of the three states of matter, solid, liquid and gas (I'm a retired chemist).
Logged

russell a

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 389
    • www.russarmstrong.com
Edited Sky
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2005, 09:06:50 AM »

First of all, I concur than this sort of splicing is easier in B&W than color, where untreated differences in color temperature can lend a false note.  But, take comfort (?) in the following observation.  In the Age of Photoshop any unusual feature of light, fortuitious coincidence, luck of timing, etc. will be assumed by an ever-growing segment of one's audience to be the result of manipulation, even if it's not. We've seen this resistance-to-believe-in-the-reality-of-the-unusual  on this forum in comments on some of Michael's photos. So, relax, you are already guilty before you unpack your camera.
Logged

Monochromophile

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Edited Sky
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2005, 10:08:25 AM »

Quote
First of all, I concur than this sort of splicing is easier in B&W than color, where untreated differences in color temperature can lend a false note.  But, take comfort (?) in the following observation.  In the Age of Photoshop any unusual feature of light, fortuitious coincidence, luck of timing, etc. will be assumed by an ever-growing segment of one's audience to be the result of manipulation, even if it's not. We've seen this resistance-to-believe-in-the-reality-of-the-unusual  on this forum in comments on some of Michael's photos. So, relax, you are already guilty before you unpack your camera.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53443\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I plead guilty as charged.  I follow whoever it  was that said  "I don't  TAKE  a picture, I MAKE a picture".
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10695
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Edited Sky
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2005, 09:02:22 PM »

Quote
I plead guilty as charged.  I follow whoever it  was that said  "I don't  TAKE  a picture, I MAKE a picture".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And I like the pictures you have "made."
Reminds me again of one of my favorite Edward Weston quotes, which went something like, "I'd print on a doormat if it would give me the effect I was looking for."

Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org
Pages: [1]   Go Up