Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Edited Sky  (Read 6421 times)
Monochromophile
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« on: December 11, 2005, 12:44:52 PM »
ReplyReply

:) [attachment=54:attachment]The sky is edited.  Does it look natural?
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7790



WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 11, 2005, 01:30:15 PM »
ReplyReply

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 website. New images each season.
Monochromophile
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #2 on: December 11, 2005, 03:04:28 PM »
ReplyReply

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: 1702



WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2005, 12:12:24 PM »
ReplyReply

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
Logged

Monochromophile
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2005, 12:27:28 PM »
ReplyReply

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


« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2005, 12:35:35 PM »
ReplyReply

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: 5759



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2005, 01:17:36 PM »
ReplyReply

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.
Logged

macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #7 on: December 12, 2005, 02:06:17 PM »
ReplyReply

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


« Reply #8 on: December 12, 2005, 03:25:37 PM »
ReplyReply

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


WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2005, 02:34:24 AM »
ReplyReply

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


« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2005, 07:57:05 AM »
ReplyReply

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
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2005, 08:06:50 AM »
ReplyReply

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


« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2005, 09:08:25 AM »
ReplyReply

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: 7790



WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2005, 08:02:22 PM »
ReplyReply

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 website. New images each season.
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad