Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Zorki5 on July 02, 2016, 06:11:26 pm

Title: Playing with conversions
Post by: Zorki5 on July 02, 2016, 06:11:26 pm
Was playing with various Topaz filters, and made these...

What do you think?
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: Zorki5 on July 02, 2016, 06:17:13 pm
Well, I know what I think about the very first one :)

A "painting" would never ever have any vignetting. I'm not sure how LuLa's thumbnail generator works, but I do not see anything close to the vignetting so apparent here...
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: stamper on July 03, 2016, 03:41:33 am
#2 is a fine image but the other two aren't to my liking. These art filters rarely "improve" an image imo.
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: RSL on July 03, 2016, 08:33:30 am
+1. If you want this kind of image learn to paint.
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on July 03, 2016, 10:44:48 am
I hate filters, especially those mimicking paintings.

As a photographer, you could have achieved the same (better?) result by using a 1-2 Mpx camera at its max ISO setting ;)
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on July 03, 2016, 11:10:49 am
#2 is a fine image but the other two aren't to my liking. These art filters rarely "improve" an image imo.

+1

Rarely indeed, but they may still save a technically inadequate shot (e.g. defocused) that otherwise is fine in composition. And those 'filters' (actually complete applications) are highly configurable to allow creative choices.

Even some modest mobile phone captures can be converted into salable impressionistic "Works of Art".

Cheers,
Bart
Title: Re: Playing with conversions
Post by: Zorki5 on July 03, 2016, 07:32:23 pm
#2 is a fine image but the other two aren't to my liking. These art filters rarely "improve" an image imo.

Would agree with that, including the general opinion on filters.

Of these three, second was fine as it was w/o filters, third was a sculpture w/o any texture whatsoever (so it kind of provoked a question of "what if..."; OK, that "if" didn't work either), but the first one is not that obvious.

The original image was, let me put it this way, not resembling this "oil painting" at all. The light was very bad, and the scene looked dull, whereas the "painting" looks as if it was a nice sunny day... The mood changed completely, 180 degrees. Two things get in the way: that dreaded vignette, and the fact that you either look at the thumbnail, or at the crude details when you enlarge it. If you try to look at it... at intermediate magnification, so to say (i.e. how you'd look at a painting), you might as well see what I'm talking about.