• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

PP matching the subject

Rob Naylor

New member
How many photogs here are making a conscious decision to choose their pp to complement the feeling or subject of any particular image.
For me the image has a great bearing on the type and amount of pp I apply, this may be initially, perhaps, a simple choice of Colour or BW, but after that there is a whole gamut of effects and treatments that can be applied to any image, and some can actively (or passively) change the original feel of an image in very dramatic ways.

Many feeling can be evoked by the use of pp treatments, I include a couple of examples of what I mean along with their original images.

#1. An electrical sub-station with overhead feed wires and graphitti.

Original




After pp to emphasis the electrical feel and the echo the "YELO" graphitti, with the colour Yellow.





#2 Valencay Chateau and ornamental gardens

Original



After pp to enhance the feeling of the "Snow White" evil queen and her domaine





I would love to see some of your images where your pp has either changed or enhanced the "feel" of them.​
 

Cem_Usakligil

Active member
Hi Rob,

My initial reaction was that my pp always enhances the feel of my images in line with my intentions; it is just that it may not be readily recognisable as such and that is how I like my pp.

But you are right in asking this important question and do not deserve my smart-alec answer, lol. Let's hope that people will chime in with some examples soon.
 

Rob Naylor

New member
Thanks for responding Cem.
The two examples I posted were intended to prompt a reaction ;)
Perhaps I went a little too far for a serious post...
They are at the "extremes" of pp (pushing towards graphic rather than photographic), and they do not represent the normal subtle enhancement that most images require.

Still, I would love to see some examples, subtle or otherwise.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
#1. An electrical sub-station with overhead feed wires and graphitti.

Original




After pp to emphasis the electrical feel and the echo the "YELO" graphitti, with the colour Yellow.



Yes, this is on fire and wonderful.



#2 Valencay Chateau and ornamental gardens

Original



After pp to enhance the feeling of the "Snow White" evil queen and her domaine




This chateau is so much more rich. This is how I'd want to see it, except perhaps for the dark sky. I find no evil there but it seems, luscious and powerful as demanded by the investment in the place!

This is a great challenge. I'd rather imagine it has pp to mach the intent rather than the subject, as the camera records one thing but our minds have different takes on what it might mean. I'll try to ferret out some of my own!

Asher
 

Maggie Terlecki

Active member
Well, I'll post one and hopefully others will join in.


The original is as taken (only resized), no post at all. I loved the mist but wanted that warm feeling of the sun in the early morning so processed it to look this way. It may be blown out now to the right in the sky, but feels like the light of the sun through the mist (for me, anyways) I also took out the offending leaves and made sure I didn't have the path that pulled my eye out of the scene.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Good pair, Maggie. Works well! I don't mind the blown out sky - I can feel the sunshine!

Asher

If this was for publication, then, you might want to add shadows to the stones to go with your new lighting.
 

Rob Naylor

New member
Well, I'll post one and hopefully others will join in.


The original is as taken (only resized), no post at all. I loved the mist but wanted that warm feeling of the sun in the early morning so processed it to look this way. It may be blown out now to the right in the sky, but feels like the light of the sun through the mist (for me, anyways) I also took out the offending leaves and made sure I didn't have the path that pulled my eye out of the scene.
A good example (IMO) of how pp can change the feel of an image. The original has a cold light and lacks a punch, both found in PP.
Thanks Maggie.
 

Chris Calohan

Active member
While I did not go in the same direction as per altering the PP vision, when I first saw this image in the "wild," I knew the image was going to be an invert of the original.

Recently taking the First Place in the Abstract division of a regional photo show this was a very successful image from vision to print.

 

Jerome Marot

Active member
I had not noticed that thread earlier. If I may post a picture which I posted recently in another thread:


For the PP, I converted to B&W with a simulated color filter so as to get this effect in the field, added some grain to enhance the effect of the fog, added a vignette to make it a bit more oppressive and changed the crop ratio to better fit the subject.

Would I need to print that for an exhibit, I would add less grain and, probably, blur a bit the foreground. It looks a little too sharp for me here, but this is an effect of the web compression. I would probably also use a duotone effect to render the shadows a bit bleaker.
 

Maggie Terlecki

Active member
While I did not go in the same direction as per altering the PP vision, when I first saw this image in the "wild," I knew the image was going to be an invert of the original.

Recently taking the First Place in the Abstract division of a regional photo show this was a very successful image from vision to print.

Love this upside down. It's just so much more dynamic and makes it different from all the other images of boat reflections. Well done!
 

Maggie Terlecki

Active member
I had not noticed that thread earlier. If I may post a picture which I posted recently in another thread:


For the PP, I converted to B&W with a simulated color filter so as to get this effect in the field, added some grain to enhance the effect of the fog, added a vignette to make it a bit more oppressive and changed the crop ratio to better fit the subject.

Would I need to print that for an exhibit, I would add less grain and, probably, blur a bit the foreground. It looks a little too sharp for me here, but this is an effect of the web compression. I would probably also use a duotone effect to render the shadows a bit bleaker.
Jerome,
You have really been able to bring out a melancholic and bleak sense to this image and in my mind's eye, I can also imagine it with a split tone with browns in the highlights and dark blues in the shadows. Seems it would work very well for what you are wanting to achieve.
:)
MAggie
 

Maggie Terlecki

Active member
Yes, this is what I had in mind with dark blues or greens. Green should work better with brown, actually.
I find it can work with both, blues and green, or a greeny-blue, :-D ... obviously it is easy to tweak for your particular image and you are the only one that can know exactly how you want it to look like. I'd love to see a version of it once you have.
Maggie
 

Martin Stephens

New member
An artist has to choose their medium at some point in the creation. Is it photography or painting? Post processing is such a general term it covers the wide range of adjusting contrast to adding collage elements. The essence of photography as a form is to take or capture, where the essence of painting is to put or create. The photograph begins with a crowded canvas to be weeded down, the painting begins with a blank canvas to be added to. These two fundamentals are radically different. Each of those forms has advantages and disadvantages to be explored and exploited by the artist.

One danger I see in photography is not recognizing it's fundamental difference from painting, and then mixing the two forms where ultimately the finished piece doesn't leverage the strengths of either form. The advantage of photography lies in its veracity. In painting, veracity is no consideration because the initial canvas is always blank (put aside photo-realistic painting for the moment). So, if one uses PP to enhance the veracity by say, improving tone range, that strengthens the photographic form. If one uses it to "add some birds to the bald sky", that reduces the veracity, and moves the piece into the realm of painting. Clearly both are valid, but may subvert the artist's intent at some point if a conscious decision isn't made. Today's powerful PP blurs the line between these two forms.

Is the photograph just one ingredient of my desire to paint, or is it the chosen medium of my expression? The answer to that will influence just how much, and what kind of PP is helpful in achieving the goal.

Here's an example from real life. In a photographic critique, an artist presented a wonderful image of a cabin in the woods with a large orange full moon. There were reflections of it in the cabin windows. Positive remarks and kudos were being given for technique, and patience, and being in the right place, and excellent framing, and so on. Fellow photographers were rightly impressed by the image. At the end, the photographer said, "I added the moon with photoshop...." Well, you could feel the air being let out of the room. To a person, all the critiquers felt they had been had. The photographer did not understand why. Not all PP is equal.

There are no lines to be drawn. What can be done today with a mouse was done in previous eras with other techniques. That is not the point. The point is for the artist to be sure they are staying true to their own goals - whether those be photographic goals or painting goals.
 
Top