Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Fri 29/03/24 01:36:45 GMT |
Message # 60850.1.1.1 Subject: Re:Technical question to producers Date: Mon 17/03/14 01:07:50 GMT Name: EdR Email: asplashofglamour@gmail.com Website: www.asplashofglamour.com |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
I can't give unsolicited critique of another photographer's work. But I will say that the shot is similar to many of my own images.
I'm not noticing any veiling lens flare in Victor's photo. Usually a veiling lens flare looks something like this;
I shot this image with Smiley and you can see how noticeable veiling lens flare can be. It's the result of light entering the lens directly from a light source and causes glare on the glass elements within the lens, kinda like how windshield glare can be hard to see thru when you're driving into the sun. In this shot, the light source is behind Smiley. I don't notice veiling flares in Victor's photo and I'd be hard pressed to believe it's there because the light source is behind the photographer. From an artistic view point, veiling lens flares can add a unique look and style. I often incorporate them in my more artistic images and some of my wetlook images, but the low contrast nature of this type of flare makes seeing details harder to see, so I don't use it much in my wetlook work.
EdR |
In reply to Message (60850.1.1) Re:Technical question to producers
By GeorgeSK - Sun 16/03/14 16:45:20 GMT Thanks, Edwin, I learned something new.. I am not against high key, but IMHO if the high key is overdone, it has a detrimental effect in showing the wetness of clothes in the highlights, especially white wet transparent ones, where the contrast of the clothes with the skin is a bit lost.
I was just thinking if what I noticed is not so much high key but rather veiling lens flare. Here is an image to illustrate.
Though photographic art is subjective and I really like Victor's style, for some reason this and similar pictures are not my cup of tea
.
|
In reply to Message (60850.1) Re:Technical question to producers
By EdR - Sun 16/03/14 16:03:13 GMT Website: www.asplashofglamour.com Every photo that comes out of my cameras (except Polaroids) are post processed, or "photoshopped". We use Photoshop CS5 to process images. I just feel that it adds to our overall look and style. A slight overexposure is high key and done right doesn't degrade the quality of the image
EdR |
In reply to Message (60850) Technical question to producers
By GeorgeSK - Sun 16/03/14 13:49:44 GMT A question to producers: Do you do post processing to your pictures or upload as they come out of the camera?
I am just asking because I like to use wetlook pics from my favourite producer (Wetfoto) as a desktop background and I noticed lately that many of the pics, especially the ones taken in bright sunlight, seem to be a bit "washed out" and overexposed.
When I do my image processing magic, they look like a totally different picture without them looking unnatural - adjusting levels and curves to get more contrast and as a finishing touch, I have a new weapon in my arsenal - Topaz Adjust 5, which gives them the required punch - nicer colours and more detail.
This was not meant as a criticism, just a question. I realise that it would be time consuming, but the basic levels and curves could be automated by finding a generic "good value" and use a Photoshop action to batch convert the images.
Thanks in advance for your reply.
|
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.004 seconds to generate ]