Photoshop This!

RyanS · June 11, 2013

I heard you needed more posts. So I thought it might be fun to offer up one of my images to anyone to retouch, post, and share. The first image is my take, a minimal monochrome conversion. Under that is the link to the full rez DNG, straight out of the camera. I'd love it if you would download the image, whip up your take, and then post the results. Feel free to do whatever you like. This photo released to you under a creative commons license (CC BY, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). The model has a release, so you are free to go to it. Enjoy.

http://blog.ryansimpkins.com/IMG_9670.dng (Note the file is about 18MB in size). I would encourage you to do the same with one of your images.

divamum · June 11, 2013

Great idea!!

Bryce Wilson · June 11, 2013

Nice image Ryan.

Thanks for posting this! It's been so long since I did something with an image just for fun, I forgot how much I enjoyed it. This was just the medicine I needed. (Along with a nice Sambucca).

Hope you enjoy my "take" on your excellent image!

RyanS · June 11, 2013

Bryce Wilson wrote: »

Nice image Ryan.

Thanks for posting this! It's been so long since I did something with an image just for fun, I forgot how much I enjoyed it. This was just the medicine I needed. (Along with a nice Sambucca).

Hope you enjoy my "take" on your excellent image!

Oh man, that's great. And you did it so fast!

Dreadnote · June 11, 2013

Or perhaps I misinterpreted your intent...?

RyanS · June 11, 2013

Dreadnote wrote: »

Or perhaps I misinterpreted your intent...?

Not at all! That is great! Good job, very interesting concept.

michaelglenn · June 12, 2013

Really cool thread you started! Here's my version. Tried to give it that classic film look.

Little lady by Michael_Glenn, on Flickr

PhilD41 · June 12, 2013

And me on travel :-( I like very this idea though. I will give it a shot when I get home this weekend. I look forward to seeing what everyone else comes up with.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

divamum · June 12, 2013

Three different versions. This shot is so sharp and nicely lit that in some ways it's a shame to do more than process it very "straight"; my first version was quite similar to Bryce's. However, decided to play a little more - I didn't like how close the rh side was, so opened that out and then did three different processing styles.

Most of the editing done in LR; slight skin softening and canvas extension done in PS; B&W conversion done in Nik Silver (I might have been able to do reach something similar in LR, but I'm still learning my way around Nik and using it whenever possible for practice)

Natural

A little bit "edgy" (only a little, mainly to bring out those EYES!!!!)

B&W

Qarik · June 12, 2013

DIVA wins!

RyanS · June 13, 2013

michaelglenn wrote: »

Really cool thread you started! Here's my version. Tried to give it that classic film look.

Very interesting take. There is a kind of texture to it that seems to come across. I almost want to use the word "grit," but it isn't really gritty. A better word might be "presence." It has a rather dimensional feel to it. It seems slightly on the red side to me on my screen, but I'm wondering if that is because it is uncalibrated.

divamum wrote: »

Three different versions. This shot is so sharp and nicely lit that in some ways it's a shame to do more than process it very "straight"; my first version was quite similar to Bryce's. However, decided to play a little more - I didn't like how close the rh side was, so opened that out and then did three different processing styles.

Most of the editing done in LR; slight skin softening and canvas extension done in PS; B&W conversion done in Nik Silver (I might have been able to do reach something similar in LR, but I'm still learning my way around Nik and using it whenever possible for practice)

Natural

A little bit "edgy" (only a little, mainly to bring out those EYES!!!!)

B&W

I really like these. I especially like the reinterpretation of the framing. This kind of visual communication and reinterpretation is really powerful. What I find interesting is comparing these with Michael's take. Notice under and around her chin? Each take has a different effect with how the chin and face "pop," which seems to have a big impact on how they feel. I especially like the "edgy" one and the effect on her eyes.

Each one so different. I'm impressed.

I'd love to see more new folks jump in too. Many times a fresh set of eyes can unlock new ways of thinking.

lensmole · June 13, 2013

Good essay Ryan! Bryce did okay and Divamum did good with the B/W version . I am not a color guy and don't pretend to know much about photoshop but I have never liked how lightroom processes raw files for color. Nik silver efex is okay but if you have the time Lightroom can do a bang up job for a B/W conversion. I know what I like and the edit michelglenn did stands out the most to me.

divamum · June 13, 2013

I ilke my crop, but I think I like MG's and Bryce's processing better than mine (those are probably closer to what I'd have done if we weren't expressly looking for "unique" alternatives). I went too light and bright for the setup - it works (kind of) although is perhaps a tad unnatural. A texture over the background could be fun; didn't have time to add one, but could be another fun look for it.

Great idea to post this Ryan. I have an image I might share for editing - I think it's a neat idea for a thread!

Gaby617 · June 13, 2013

Cool.. might have to take a crack @ this tonight after work!

divamum · June 13, 2013

Also wanted to say I LOVE the Alice composite! Adorable!

lensmole · June 13, 2013

Generally speaking I don't know anything about posing or proper camera angles when making such

images. However I did read somewhere that a persons eyes should not look in the opposite direction of

their nose, although that is not the case in this image. I do see her eyes looking in the same direction as

her nose but to the extreme showing the white part of the eye and when a person looks to the extreme

right or left it also causes the eye to bulge and I see this as a distraction.Can anyone

elaborate on this subject and provide a rule of thumb or some type of guideline on what is acceptable

and what isn't ?

StueveShots · June 13, 2013

Love the idea! Love the original! And I am fascinated by the submissions so far.

I needed a break at work, so I decided to try a natural and a black and white take. I also wanted to use a square crop because to my eye, for some odd reason, it plays up that quirky little lift in her bangs. Anyway...here goes...

1. Natural

2. Black and White

anonymouscuban · June 13, 2013

OK... here is my go at it:

RyanS · June 13, 2013

You guys are totally inspiring. More ideas...

Sunflower

Infrared

Old Chems

Sventekoz · June 14, 2013

Here's my interpretation. Thanks for posting the original!

RyanS · June 14, 2013

Sventekoz wrote: »

Here's my interpretation. Thanks for posting the original!

Great job. Was the border something you got some place, or did you actually build it?

Sventekoz · June 14, 2013

RyanS wrote: »

Great job. Was the border something you got some place, or did you actually build it?

Thanks, Ryan. I used Florabella actions to do that.

Earache · June 14, 2013

Thanks for the great thread Ryan!
Fun to see all the interpretations, and to do one too...

I was captivated by this young lady's azure gaze, so, I went antique with extra blue.

Gaby617 · June 15, 2013

Here's my edits ...

For the color version I wanted to give her a slight vintage look. Something about her kept me thinking this was taking many years ago fore some reason. I didn't want to lose the amazing eyes along w/ the edit so I knew I had to somehow keep that a nice focal point. W/ the B&W I just went w/ the flow and wanted to keep some of the minimal freckles I smoothed out in color. I feel B&W gives you the obligations to show more details since its a monotone image so I like to leave a little more texture then I would if it where color. This was a good workout to utilize some presets I have made in LR4. Some awesome ones in here, hope to see more.

PhilD41 · June 16, 2013

Hummmm... for whatever reason my version of Adobe Aftershot Pro won't import this file. Just curious, did you convert it to a DNG from a different RAW file type? Google tells me that ASP doesn't work with converted files for some reason. Oh well, if I ever get it to work I will give it a go.

Gaby617 - I am really liking your color rendition above. Very nice!!

RyanS · June 16, 2013

I think Corel makes AfterShot Pro, not Adobe (it looks like a Lightroom knock-off). I exported this image as a DNG from Lr 3. It was originally a Canon RAW file. Is there an update to ASP or something that fixes DNG import? I would contact Corel and ask. Not supporting converted DNGs seems really... odd. I'm sure there is a good reason and I'd love to hear what it is. Converting to DNG is the recommended procedure by Adobe as it eliminates potential issues with proprietary camera support in the future. DNG is an open standard, making it more likely it will be supported long-term. That openness should mean it is possible for Corel to easily implement it in to their products. I wonder if Corel makes a similar recommendation about RAW conversion.

CowgirlMama · June 16, 2013

Hi. I'm new, but couldn't find an intro section, so I guess I'm just jumping in. :P Here's my edit.

RyanS · June 17, 2013

CowgirlMama wrote: »

Hi. I'm new, but couldn't find an intro section, so I guess I'm just jumping in. :P Here's my edit.

Wow, that is really splendid. I love the look. I wondered when someone was going to post a low-contrasty version. I'm kind of a sucker for the look. You did a great job. Welcome to dgrin!

PhilD41 · June 17, 2013

RyanS wrote: »

I think Corel makes AfterShot Pro, not Adobe (it looks like a Lightroom knock-off). I exported this image as a DNG from Lr 3. It was originally a Canon RAW file. Is there an update to ASP or something that fixes DNG import? I would contact Corel and ask. Not supporting converted DNGs seems really... odd. I'm sure there is a good reason and I'd love to hear what it is. Converting to DNG is the recommended procedure by Adobe as it eliminates potential issues with proprietary camera support in the future. DNG is an open standard, making it more likely it will be supported long-term. That openness should mean it is possible for Corel to easily implement it in to their products. I wonder if Corel makes a similar recommendation about RAW conversion.

Yeah, it is Corel, sorry I was typing in an airport and not thinking completely. I thought it odd that it wasn't supported as well. Not sure I would call ASP a knock-off as Bibble had been around for quite a while. It is nice to have something that works in Linux even if it is only about 90% of LR. I am pretty sure it is suppose to support it, but there is a bug that does not allow it. I have tried on my Linux machine at home and Win7 box at work. Hopefully they fix it soon. (I won't hold my breath though).

Photoshop This!

Comments