Options

Alstroemeria

fatheroftwofatheroftwo Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
edited July 27, 2007 in Landscapes
Speeding Train:

525884407_b2fb5e3d71.jpg

(Sorry about the title, just starting and getting the hang of Digital Grin.)
Artists have a blank canvass and they create from what they see, whereas photographers take what they see and create something.

f2.smugmug.com

Comments

  • Options
    Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited July 23, 2007
    It is a cool photobowdown.gifthumb....but just cannot get the gist of relating this to a Peruvian Lily...Hmmmm but I will keep trying:D
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • Options
    jamesljamesl Registered Users Posts: 642 Major grins
    edited July 23, 2007
    fatheroftwo wrote:
    Speeding Train:

    (Sorry about the title, just starting and getting the hang of Digital Grin.)

    Ahh, my eyes!!!! :D Sweet shot. Did you do this in Photoshop, or did you zoom the lens back to get this? Regardless, it is a pretty neat effect.

    James
    James Langford
    Langford Photography
    http://www.langfordphotography.com
    james@langfordphotography.com
  • Options
    USAIRUSAIR Registered Users Posts: 2,646 Major grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    Somehow I missed this

    Very cool clap.gif

    Fred
    http://www.riverbendphotos.com/
    http://www.facebook.com/Riverbendphotos
  • Options
    RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,937 moderator
    edited July 27, 2007
    Neat shot. clap.gif

    Regards,
    My Pics
  • Options
    fatheroftwofatheroftwo Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    USAIR wrote:
    Somehow I missed this

    Probably because I made a mistake with the title?!? headscratch.gif
    Artists have a blank canvass and they create from what they see, whereas photographers take what they see and create something.

    f2.smugmug.com
  • Options
    ivarivar Registered Users Posts: 8,395 Major grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    I like the shot, but I think the effect is slightly overdone. If you can get the effect down to about 50-70 % I think I would like it a lot more thumb.gif
    Ivar
    www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
  • Options
    fatheroftwofatheroftwo Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    ivar wrote:
    I like the shot, but I think the effect is slightly overdone. If you can get the effect down to about 50-70 % I think I would like it a lot more thumb.gif
    When doing the radial blur (zoom) on this image I did it at different settings: 10, 20, 30, 40 and so on, then compared each of these before choosing the setting which looked dramatic, but still looked realistic. I settled upon a setting of 30 in the end.

    So, I'm well within the 50-70% you have suggested. In fact if I had done 50-70% it would indeed have looked silly and overdone.
    Artists have a blank canvass and they create from what they see, whereas photographers take what they see and create something.

    f2.smugmug.com
  • Options
    ivarivar Registered Users Posts: 8,395 Major grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    fatheroftwo wrote:
    When doing the radial blur (zoom) on this image I did it at different settings: 10, 20, 30, 40 and so on, then compared each of these before choosing the setting which looked dramatic, but still looked realistic. I settled upon a setting of 30 in the end.

    So, I'm well within the 50-70% you have suggested. In fact if I had done 50-70% it would indeed have looked silly and overdone.
    I'm sorry, I meant about 50-70% of the effect you currently have. Not sure if the radial blur has a linear progression, but if it does, it would be about 15-21% I guess.
    Ivar
    www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
  • Options
    fatheroftwofatheroftwo Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    ivar wrote:
    I'm sorry, I meant about 50-70% of the effect you currently have. Not sure if the radial blur has a linear progression, but if it does, it would be about 15-21% I guess.
    Well in my view that didn't look effective enough with such a low amount of blur - the streaks simply didn't look right when compared with images where the effect has been produced using the lens. I settled upon 30% because of the impact of speed presented in this image.

    This image helped me to come second in a Worth1000 photography competition back in March this year, so when producing it I knew that it needed to look good to have any chance.
    Artists have a blank canvass and they create from what they see, whereas photographers take what they see and create something.

    f2.smugmug.com
  • Options
    pyrtekpyrtek Registered Users Posts: 539 Major grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    fatheroftwo wrote:
    Well in my view [...]

    But by posting here you asked for others' views. ivar's is one of them. :)
    Bernard
    http://bertold.zenfolio.com
  • Options
    fatheroftwofatheroftwo Registered Users Posts: 58 Big grins
    edited July 27, 2007
    pyrtek wrote:
    But by posting here you asked for others' views. ivar's is one of them. :)

    I'm simply explaining my reasons for the effect I settled upon.
    Artists have a blank canvass and they create from what they see, whereas photographers take what they see and create something.

    f2.smugmug.com
Sign In or Register to comment.