How do I achieve this affect.

CajunKim

Hello everyone. I have been out of the picture taking for a while and now I am back and trying to grab it by the horns. iI am looking to achieve this affect and don't know if this is a certain software or if I need to do something special with photoshop CS4. Here is the website that I found this look on. Any help is greatly appreciated. It's a painting affect but I don't know how to achieve it. And I love this look. Thanks everyone.

http://weddings.zeppix.com/html_gallery.cfm?menu_itemID=533257&load=html

CajunKim

BinaryFx

Note: Personal opinion mixed in with answer:

To achieve the effect, one would make inappropriate, ugly and heavy handed use of HDR tone mapping or other contrast/detail tricks.


Regards,

Stephen Marsh

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/
http://prepression.blogspot.com/

pathfinder

Aw, Stephen, don't hold back, tell us what you really think!

I agree that some form of hdr, or faux hdr, with tone mapping, was used.

This seems to be a popular look today for some folks.

PhotoLasVegas

It's basically HDR and you can do this with PS... search HDR for instructions on how to do it but basically you take 2 to 100 photos of the exact same subject (no changes except for exposure, expose in a range from "underexposed" to "overexposed") and run it thru the HDR function in PS.

there's also so pseudo-HDR functions you can use, and sometimes just an extreme pop of the blacks, then fill light, then high clarity and high contrast will do similar.

craig_d

BinaryFx wrote: »

Note: Personal opinion mixed in with answer:

To achieve the effect, one would make inappropriate, ugly and heavy handed use of HDR tone mapping or other contrast/detail tricks.

I'm not sure why you call that "personal opinion". It seems objectively factual to me. I'm not sure if it's HDR as such, or just heavy abuse of local contrast, but I don't like it.

MarkR

I'd prefer not to call those pictures HDR -- they were not likely using multiple exposures to increase the dynamic range of the image. Instead, I'd prefer to call them tone-mapped.

There are plenty of tone-mapping tools out there, from the "single image HDR" tools in CS5, to the Topaz Adjust plugin, to the standalone capabilities of LightZone.

I personally think the images linked to are a bit heavy handed, but, de gustibus non est disputandum and all that.

pathfinder

I call those single shot RAWs that are tone mapped "faux hdr" Mark, for want of a better term. That was what I was referring to in my post as well. I did think some of the images captured a range of lights and darks that would be difficult to capture well with a single exposure.

Part of the problem with the original question, is that the link leads to many images, not just one, so then I wonder which specific image they are referring to.

MarkR

pathfinder wrote: »

I call those single shot RAWs that are tone mapped "faux hdr" Mark, for want of a better term.

No quibbling here.

pathfinder wrote: »

That was what I was referring to in my post as well. I did think some of the images captured a range of lights and darks that would be difficult to capture well with a single exposure.

I was always surprised at how much tonal values I could get out of LightZone, and later Topaz Adjust. But I don't think any of the "faux HDR" images are using any more data than captured by a single raw exposure.
[/quote]

Part of the problem with the original question, is that the link leads to many images, not just one, so then I wonder which specific image they are referring to.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. We'll have to see if the OP wants to clarify which shots were being referred to.