Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Does this qualify as a Luminous Landscape?  (Read 2904 times)
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5002



WWW
« Reply #40 on: February 15, 2013, 12:42:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Slob,

One of the things that often happens when people read for the purpose of finding an insult to make...

You can say whatever you want about my posts, I generally believe in the "stick and stones...," but you just engaged in a personal and direct attack that I do not appreciate: you play games with my first name. You chose to shorten it into something that, in English language, means: "a lazy and slovenly person."

At least i post under my real name. What is yours?
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RedwoodGuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417


« Reply #41 on: February 15, 2013, 01:44:51 PM »
ReplyReply

In the interest of not having any misunderstanding here, "Slob" is shorthand, or an abbreviation for "SLOBODAN" - using simply the first four letters. In most responses to me in this forum, I was referred to as "RG" or often "GUY" and only perhaps on the rarest occasion "redwoodguy."  I fully understood it was just a shorthand typing convention. Who cares, I don't.

I guess I could have typed "SLO" or "DAN" or "SLOBO" or "LOBO" in keeping with custom employed here by others. I bet each of those would bring the same complaint. I am no more interested to keep typing SLOBODAN, than others are interested in typing REDWOODGUY. 

I really have to ask once more: What is your motivation here? Mine is showing and discussing photography, not pouring over posts looking for insults to the poster.

I am going to try it this way: Please go pester and hound and insult someone else.
 
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5002



WWW
« Reply #42 on: February 15, 2013, 02:02:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice try.

Of all the possible variations of shortening, the simplest of which would be SB, my initials, just like people are shortening yours into RG, you chose the one that has a distinct, and negative meaning in English.

On the other hand, should you decide to introduce yourself under your real name, I would not have any problems in spelling it fully. Come to think of it, for someone whose tirades and critiques verge on a verbal diarrhea, you seem too bent on abbreviating names.

As for insults, let me see:

It was YOU who embarked on a hunt for "heavy weights" here, trying to dethrone alleged forum "royalties," smoke out "peacocks." It was YOU who called the rest "sheep," blindly following the former.

It was YOU who called Rob C "Mr. Hefner," and made allusions to his work as pornography. It was YOU who directly called others "rude, nasty and arrogant."
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RedwoodGuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417


« Reply #43 on: February 15, 2013, 02:11:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Again, what's your motivation here, and why are you hijacking this fellas thread for this nonsense?
Logged
amolitor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 755


WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2013, 02:14:46 PM »
ReplyReply

He has an excellent question, Slobodan. What ARE you trying to do?

If you want RG to admit error, obviously that's never going to happen.
If you're trying to expose him as a fake intellectual, posturing like a clown, I think that's pretty well established already.
Perhaps you're just having fun, poking at the mangy beast with a stick, to see if it spits and hisses at you? That's fun for a bit, but ultimately cheapens you.
Logged

- Andrew

My awesome blog about photography: http://photothunk.blogspot.com
David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 15, 2013, 02:29:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Gentlemen. Peace! Please! I have learned something from each of you. Thanks for that.
Logged

Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1830



« Reply #46 on: February 15, 2013, 10:06:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Gentlemen. Peace! Please! I have learned something from each of you. Thanks for that.
Ditto: Peace please, before having to push the 'close' button...
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 16, 2013, 10:35:14 AM »
ReplyReply

After a brief email discussion with Chris Sanderson, I have unlocked the thread. I was concerned that it was becoming a catalyst for some tough rhetoric that I was becoming uncomfortable with. Chalk it up to newbie nervousness, but I have been looking for a place to discuss and understand the issues that you all are so passionate about. It's not that I have very delicate sensibilities, I am just trying to understand the culture here and if the tremendous amount I have learned in a very brief time is any indication, I look forward to future dialogue. This thread may well be played out, but I just wanted you to know.
Best regards,
Logged

David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #48 on: February 16, 2013, 01:20:12 PM »
ReplyReply

So, at the risk of being boring, I decided to rework this image from the original, cropped DNG. Sarting in LR4, all settings were set to default. If it isn't mentioned, the setting remains at LR4 default. I then moved to PS CS6. So here's the sequence following all the prior suggestions:
LR4:WB upped from 4900 (camera's choice) to 5500 (thanks W Walker), contrast +30, highlights, shadows, and whites all set to +75, blacks decreased to -35 (Thanks RG). This basically "spread" out the histogram. Red, orange, and yellow saturation were set to +35 and aqua HUE at +35. Sharpening settings were amount 50, radius 1, detail 50, masking 90. Noise reduction settings were luminance 50, detail 50, contrast 0, color 50, and detail 50. Nothing else was adjusted and then I edited in CS6.
CS6: First I spotted out some distracting mailboxes. High pass sharpening at 3 pixels was applied through a mask only to the earth. A SEP2 (full contrast and structure) layer was added with "luminosity" blend mode, 100% opacity/fill. Then I spotted out dust (just a couple). With a Hue Saturation layer, I bumped red saturation +20, yellow saturation +15 and lightness -5; all other settings were 0. I then applied unsharp mask (100, 0.8, 0) only to the earth (no sky). Then I signed it!
I think it addresses Slobodan's concern about the cyan overtones of the sky (Thanks SB). The SEP2 luminosity blend added tonal variations to the sky (Thanks, Chrisc). I appreciate all of your suggestions as I learned a couple new things and gained the perspective of seeing through your eyes.
Logged

David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 16, 2013, 01:22:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Geez Dave! Can't you remember anything Wink
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1798


Editing Allowed


« Reply #50 on: February 16, 2013, 01:31:40 PM »
ReplyReply

When I did my edit, I only limited myself to the sky, leaving the ground alone. I am close to saying the ground seems a bit oversaturated now.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 16, 2013, 01:36:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Chrisc, yes I realize. The saturation could be easily remedied now. Appreciate the opinion. Maybe it'd fit in Arizona Highways Wink
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1798


Editing Allowed


« Reply #52 on: February 16, 2013, 05:25:58 PM »
ReplyReply

My thoughts, exactly.  Cheesy
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
RedwoodGuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417


« Reply #53 on: February 16, 2013, 09:57:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Well this new version is very different. How do you feel about it? Does it get to more of what you wanted?
Logged
David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #54 on: February 17, 2013, 07:53:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Well this new version is very different. How do you feel about it? Does it get to more of what you wanted?
Honestly, I'm kinda wrung out with it. I do think it is a more "honest" representation, certainly in terms of the post processing. As an exercise, I wanted to go back to the original and incorporate what I'd picked up from the input from all of you. I am happy with the earth; that's what I remember. The sky is still too B/W for my taste, but it IS unmodified, except for the texture; it was not a flat sky, but the color is off. I could make it more blue, cyan, or even somewhat green due to the haze, but I've lost my frame of reference in some regard. I will "put it away" and come back to it later, I think.
Logged

RedwoodGuy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417


« Reply #55 on: February 17, 2013, 08:19:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Honestly, I'm kinda wrung out with it. I do think it is a more "honest" representation, certainly in terms of the post processing. As an exercise, I wanted to go back to the original and incorporate what I'd picked up from the input from all of you. I am happy with the earth; that's what I remember. The sky is still too B/W for my taste, but it IS unmodified, except for the texture; it was not a flat sky, but the color is off. I could make it more blue, cyan, or even somewhat green due to the haze, but I've lost my frame of reference in some regard. I will "put it away" and come back to it later, I think.
Good move. Sometimes you have to step back and relax a bit to regain your idea behind it. FYI, they both work for me, but they tell different stories, have different feelings to them. Go with your gut.
Logged
David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #56 on: February 27, 2013, 02:28:43 PM »
ReplyReply

OK then... cyan-ish sky? Tongue
To close this one out, I wanted to post one last lesson that I learned. Sorry if this is getting tedious. Slobodan offered to make some tweaks to the image so that I could see how he might approach it, not just the cyan-ish sky, but all of it. In the off chance some other neophytes could learn from this, with Slobodan's permission, I am posting his process done entirely in LR4.3. I was not fully aware that LR was that powerful and have been "going to school" trying to discern SB's process. I will tell you that as I went back to the original cropped DNG, I was able to create the identical image after I'd fully deconstructed what he'd done. I know this is a bit technical, but it was an enormously informative exercise for me.
In the Develop module, moving top to bottom (if I don't mention it, it wasn't changed), WB tint was moved to +15. Exposure was increased to 0.6, contrast +63, shadows +50, whites +50, blacks -70. Hue blue +5, Saturation red +20, orange +20. Sharpening went to 60, 0.8, 100, and 40 (from 50, 1, 50, 90 defaults). Luminosity NR was reduced to 20.
After all this, I was VERY frustrated because my image didn't look like his! Was he keeping secrets from me, I pondered. Nay! I discovered something new: Graduated filters, which heretofore I had not realized existed. Similar to, but more powerful than the gradient tool in ACR. Slobodan first did a "top down" drag over the entire image with clarity increased to 100. Second, another top-down drag centered on the lower 1/4 of the sky with exposure -0.22, contrast +50, highlights +60, clarity +100, and saturation -20. Finally, a bottoms-up drag to about the lower 1/3 of the sky with temp +10. The first subtly increased contrast and detail with a little desaturation in the sky (dealt with the cyan-ish overtone of the OP). The last increased the warmth in the cliffs. And that was it!
Slobodan, thank you for the wonderful lesson and for being so generous with your time! Not so curmudgeonly after all Wink.
Logged

David Eckels
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 822


Paris sidewalk cafe


WWW
« Reply #57 on: February 27, 2013, 02:31:30 PM »
ReplyReply

And "mine" for comparison.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1798


Editing Allowed


« Reply #58 on: February 27, 2013, 05:28:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Hard to tell one from the other. Good working through a problem.
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
l_d_allan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205



WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2013, 01:26:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Sunset obviously.

To me, it doesn't actually seem like a sunset. The image works well on its own, so perhaps that is a "who cares"? But once you mentioned that the image was obviously a sunset, I found myself liking the image just a bit less.

Also, it seems just a bit tilted. Even if the horizon and plateau lines are actually horizontal, one of my early reactions was that the left side should be just a bit higher. Maybe I'm just naturally tipsy?
Logged

retired in Colorado Springs, CO, USA ... hobby'ist with mostly Canon gear ... let me know if you're in the area and would like a free guided tour of our photographically "target-rich environment"
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad