Ds-100 first crack

Moving PicturesMoving Pictures Registered Users Posts: 384 Major grins
edited April 16, 2012 in The Dgrin Challenges
C&C welcome. Had the chance to shoot a model in remarkably period costume today ....
Newspaper photogs specialize in drive-by shootings.
Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net

Comments

  • Moving PicturesMoving Pictures Registered Users Posts: 384 Major grins
    edited April 6, 2012
    Or does a bit of film grain filter work better?
    Newspaper photogs specialize in drive-by shootings.
    Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
  • Moving PicturesMoving Pictures Registered Users Posts: 384 Major grins
    edited April 6, 2012
    Aaron Nelson wrote: »
    I like the 2nd

    whats that black box looking thing coming into frame on the right side? can it be cloned out possibly?

    Eh, it's just a gizmo. Electrical box. I thought, maybe, that leaving it in would make it appear less "polished" ... it's an easy crop.

    I like the second, but I'm wondering if the loss of detail on the blouse is a showstopper. It's just the standard PS "film grain" filter, and I like it ... but for that loss of detail. Maybe I should copy the main layer, film grain it, and mask/edit the detail of the blouse back to the main layer?
    Newspaper photogs specialize in drive-by shootings.
    Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
  • PedalGirlPedalGirl Registered Users Posts: 794 Major grins
    edited April 6, 2012
    I like the concept, but she looks too "new" against the surroundings...ie the background looks like an aged photo but not the person. Also if you age that part of the picture, perhaps some detail in her top would come back? Seems like there's a spot in the lower right corner where the ground didn't get aged with the rest of the picture.
    Pho-tog-ra-pher (n) 1. One who practices photography 2. one obsessed with capturing life with their camera. 3. One who eats, sleeps and breathes photographs. 4. One who sees the world in 4x6.
    www.lisaspeakmanphotography.com
  • richterslrichtersl Registered Users Posts: 3,322 Major grins
    edited April 7, 2012
    I like the concept too, but agree with pedalgirl that she looks too "new". Perhaps she can pin her hair up? Or wear a suitable hat?

    I would try having her pose in front of an old building, if there's a suitable one where you live. Or, try posing her in a natural setting like near a body of water or some other unique landmark. The people of that time period loved their Sunday outings: http://www.bonnienilsen.com/places/gettysburg.php
    Linda

    http://lrichters.smugmug.com
  • torrbraetorrbrae Registered Users Posts: 203 Major grins
    edited April 7, 2012
    Agree with the others - like the concept but the model looks too "new". As richersl suggests, tying up the hair or using a hat would probably place more in the 1912's. Also find the "whiteness" of the blouse distracting, feel would be better toned down, when would get more detail back.
  • Moving PicturesMoving Pictures Registered Users Posts: 384 Major grins
    edited April 7, 2012
    OK. Feedback noted. The lady was dressed in costume for a play, and I was able to borrow her for two minutes on a blasted cold day ... won't have that option again.

    I'll have to reload on something else... not sure what, tho.

    THanks for the input, all!
    Newspaper photogs specialize in drive-by shootings.
    Forum for Canadian shooters: www.canphoto.net
  • lkbartlkbart Registered Users Posts: 1,912 Major grins
    edited April 7, 2012
    If you shoot in raw, you should be able to pull some of the detail back into the blouse with the recovery adjustment - to me her blouse just looks over-exposed. If her blouse were not so overly bright, I think the photo would have a complete different look. The rest of the shot seems well exposed, but I'd also clone out the wire & the dark thing on the right.
    ~Lillian~
    A photograph is an artistic expression of life, captured one moment at a time . . .
    http://bartlettphotoart.smugmug.com/
  • dniednie Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 1,351 Major grins
    edited April 8, 2012
    This may sound strange, but she looks black and white on a sepia background. I think you could probably play with the processing and get it to work. Worth a try anyway.
    Donna

    My SmugMug
  • PedalGirlPedalGirl Registered Users Posts: 794 Major grins
    edited April 8, 2012
    dnie wrote: »
    This may sound strange, but she looks black and white on a sepia background. I think you could probably play with the processing and get it to work. Worth a try anyway.

    You hit the nail on the head! Yes, I agree... that's exactly why she looked too "new" to me.
    Pho-tog-ra-pher (n) 1. One who practices photography 2. one obsessed with capturing life with their camera. 3. One who eats, sleeps and breathes photographs. 4. One who sees the world in 4x6.
    www.lisaspeakmanphotography.com
  • ghinsonghinson Registered Users Posts: 933 Major grins
    edited April 8, 2012
    Convert the whole thing to B&W, and add some vignetting, and perhaps some vignetted blur.
    uosuıɥ ƃǝɹƃ
    ackdoc.com
  • billseyebillseye Registered Users Posts: 847 Major grins
    edited April 16, 2012
    Hmm... interesting thread. I would think that even in RAW, it's gonna be hard to get detail back into the blouse, which appears on my monitor to be completely clipped. Recovery in such cases will only yield a flat contourless grey (or sepia).

    To me I think this shot has an exposure problem. If it had some harsh shadows, I'd swear there was a overly bright fill flash at work, yet the wall seems well exposed. So, seems to be moot, since it was an in the moment shot...
    Bill Banning

    Check out billseye photos on SmugMug
Sign In or Register to comment.