Let's See it! Before/After Smudge DigiArt

3n-out

Can you share your before and after smudge work? Let's see what you have come up with. Although I'm no expert I find it relaxing to work with a photo and make it artsy... Everytime I do one I learn something new.. I know some of you are pretty good at this and I for one would be interested in seeing your before/after shots.

Hope your in for this one! Looking forward to replies to this thread.....

Here is a picture of my Dog...

Before



After

3n-out

.... I almost feel like I'm on everyone's ignore list.

Dogdots

I like what you did to your dogs photo. I mess around to in the filters with my photos. Although I'm no pro. I just like to play with them.

I just thought I would let you know I like it.

Dogdots/Mary

ShepsMom

I like painter effect, but i have no patience for this. I did attempt with very little success. I guess it's not something meant to be for me

3n-out

Wow - there are photog's actually reading my posts!

Thanks for the kind compliments. This took about 4 hours work through 3 nights. When I get tired I just save it and come back to it. The toughest part for me is actually knowing when I'm complete. Seems the more I look at it the more I feel I have to do and that could be my biggest problem. Graphic overkill isn't for everyone.

Thanks! Hope to see you photog's posting up some smudge digiart...

Here is another I did of the American Bald Eagle I took over the summer...

Before



After



Let's See your Digital Art!!!!

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

Wow - there are photog's actually reading my posts!

Thanks for the kind compliments. This took about 4 hours work through 3 nights. When I get tired I just save it and come back to it. The toughest part for me is actually knowing when I'm complete. Seems the more I look at it the more I feel I have to do and that could be my biggest problem. Graphic overkill isn't for everyone.

Thanks! Hope to see you photog's posting up some smudge digiart...

Here is another I did of the American Bald Eagle I took over the summer...

Before



After



Let's See your Digital Art!!!!

Beautiful work How did you get his Eagle photo?

Gotta ask you....how do you do your smudge art? I do understand what you mean about working and working on a photo. I have that problem sometimes. It just never seems to end.

Dogdots/Mary

3n-out

I little town close to mine was having a bird exibition. They had about 10 exotic birds there and this bald eagle was one of them. I was about 10 feet away as he was perched and shot this with my 70-200L. Not a bad shot actually. I have others of red hawks, falcons and owls which aren't to bad either. All ver close facial shoots of these majestic birds.

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

I little town close to mine was having a bird exibition. They had about 10 exotic birds there and this bald eagle was one of them. I was about 10 feet away as he was perched and shot this with my 70-200L. Not a bad shot actually. I have others of red hawks, falcons and owls which aren't to bad either. All ver close facial shoots of these majestic birds.

Lucky you I would love to have the lens and the chance to photograph these birds.

I have the 70-300 which is nice, but there is much better out there

There's a Bald Eagle that flies the river every morning and evening where I live. I have seen it three times now, but just flies to dang high for my lens.

Dogdots/Mary

3n-out

Yes, I remember I wasn't sure what to expect and it was even raining that day which made it a great day to take photos. I never expected to get this close to these birds to take pictures like this. I was quite a suprise when I saw them on my computer monitor.

3n-out

Okay - Just to see if I can spark this thread here is one more.. A Red Tail Hawk..

Before....



After

3n-out

Dogdots wrote:

Beautiful work How did you get his Eagle photo?

Gotta ask you....how do you do your smudge art? I do understand what you mean about working and working on a photo. I have that problem sometimes. It just never seems to end.

Dogdots/Mary

To Answer your question I start out using a fairly hard smudge brush and smudge directional to bring out the curves of the graphic then I apply a fairly hard unmask sharp. which grains everything. from there I use any brush and Size that I think will work and work out the details. I then use Burn tools to burn the highlights. Once I'm done with all that I go back to the smudge tool and blend it all together.

But yes! The hardest part of all this is to know when to say when.

I find I just want to keep going and going and going and I really think the best stopping point is somewhere between not enough and too much graphic manipulation. Now if I can only figure out where that point is. hehehehhe...

Thanks!! I hope to see one of yours.... I know I can't be the only person doing this type of work.. I never really tried this technique on a portrait photo or landscape I bet it would lend itself well though.

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

To Answer your question I start out using a fairly hard smudge brush and smudge directional to bring out the curves of the graphic then I apply a fairly hard unmask sharp. which grains everything. from there I use any brush and Size that I think will work and work out the details. I then use Burn tools to burn the highlights. Once I'm done with all that I go back to the smudge tool and blend it all together.

But yes! The hardest part of all this is to know when to say when.

I find I just want to keep going and going and going and I really think the best stopping point is somewhere between not enough and too much graphic manipulation. Now if I can only figure out where that point is. hehehehhe...

Thanks!! I hope to see one of yours.... I know I can't be the only person doing this type of work.. I never really tried this technique on a portrait photo or landscape I bet it would lend itself well though.

Your work is very good. I could never get this good...well with time I may get kinda close

Your last posting is beautiful. The original is awesome. The reflections in the eyes---WOW

I spent my morning today following a Bald Eagle. First saw it in a field, then a tree, then just flying. After we left when we lost it...there again it was following us down the road.

But sorry to say my photos didn't turn out well :cry . Foggy, snowy day and windy to boot. But it was fun just watching it and trying to get something half decent.

Dogdots/Mary

3n-out

If you have photoshop you could easily do this type of smudge art. It isn't that difficult if you work it across a week or so when you have time. I think the real trick it this type of graphic manipulation is to follow the contours of the curves on your subject and to use different brushes along the way. No one brush is the right brush, just select different ones and different sizes and chip away. Then Burn the highlights.

I would be willing to put together a tutorial on how I did these and others but it doesn't appear there is enough interest in this. I was really hoping to see what other people are doing. I have seen beautiful smudge work on human portraits but not so much or any other subjects ie. Landscaps and animals.

There is another thread here, "Which I didn't see until I posted this thread" that has some smudge work in it. Which are really nice and they look much different then mine, so it must be the techniques that differ. That was why I was hoping to see other work.

I'm not really sure I can even consider this type of work smudging. Although I use a lot of smudging and spend hours doing it. But I also use burning and blurs and sharpening and pretty much everything I can "vision" the way I want it to look.

Af far as capturing the eagle you have seen. I would suggest go by daily "if you can" and look for him. Watch him and learn his ways. I'm no birder by any means but I understand from reading posts from "GREAT" birders they have more success understanding the habits and habitats of the breeds and this gives them the advantage of nature which may equal success. Not sure - but they do something right because I have seen AWESOME Photos here on Dgrin and other sites that lead me to believe that is the best way for award winning shots.

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

If you have photoshop you could easily do this type of smudge art. It isn't that difficult if you work it across a week or so when you have time. I think the real trick it this type of graphic manipulation is to follow the contours of the curves on your subject and to use different brushes along the way. No one brush is the right brush, just select different ones and different sizes and chip away. Then Burn the highlights.

I would be willing to put together a tutorial on how I did these and others but it doesn't appear there is enough interest in this. I was really hoping to see what other people are doing. I have seen beautiful smudge work on human portraits but not so much or any other subjects ie. Landscaps and animals.

There is another thread here, "Which I didn't see until I posted this thread" that has some smudge work in it. Which are really nice and they look much different then mine, so it must be the techniques that differ. That was why I was hoping to see other work.

I'm not really sure I can even consider this type of work smudging. Although I use a lot of smudging and spend hours doing it. But I also use burning and blurs and sharpening and pretty much everything I can "vision" the way I want it to look.

Af far as capturing the eagle you have seen. I would suggest go by daily "if you can" and look for him. Watch him and learn his ways. I'm no birder by any means but I understand from reading posts from "GREAT" birders they have more success understanding the habits and habitats of the breeds and this gives them the advantage of nature which may equal success. Not sure - but they do something right because I have seen AWESOME Photos here on Dgrin and other sites that lead me to believe that is the best way for award winning shots.

I would love to see a tutorial on your smudging as I'm sure many others would to. I'm sure there are many many ways to do this and its to the "eye" of the person doing it on the way it turns out. Most people don't venture into the other goodies of Photoshop. So this would be another door open to those who wish to venture beyond the basics but are afraid to ask.

I always say my book is open and I'm looking at filling in the pages with knowledge

Your so right about learning the habits of the animals you wish to photograph. From our reading of the place we were at yesterday the Bald Eagle is not sapose to be there at this time of year. But we have had a mild fall and a quick winter set in. And the waters are still open on some of the rivers. Today I'll be reading up on the Bald Eagle and try to learn its habits quickly and head out there again this week.

Question about your 100-400L -- is it clear wide open? And if you take a photo wide open and want to crop it does the photo crop in good?

Dogdots/Mary

3n-out

Question about your 100-400L -- is it clear wide open? And if you take a photo wide open and want to crop it does the photo crop in good?

Dogdots/Mary

Yes, my 100-400 L is quite good. It can take wonderful pictures wide open and performs best in good light. You really can't go wrong with that lens for the price. It can also be stacked with the 1.4x teleconverter although you loose a little quality it is still the best buy for the buck to get the reach all use amatures crave. Croppings are quite clear with the 100-400 and I don't see why anyone would be disapointed with it. Are you looking to pick one up for a Christmas present? That would be a sweet gift... :ivar

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

Yes, my 100-400 L is quite good. It can take wonderful pictures wide open and performs best in good light. You really can't go wrong with that lens for the price. It can also be stacked with the 1.4x teleconverter although you loose a little quality it is still the best buy for the buck to get the reach all use amatures crave. Croppings are quite clear with the 100-400 and I don't see why anyone would be disapointed with it. Are you looking to pick one up for a Christmas present? That would be a sweet gift... :ivar

Oh yeah....it would make a wonderful Christmas present Only thing is I asked for a 10-22 instead. Guess I will have to ask for it on my birthday. Lucky me it's in January

I did some checking and the price of the 100-400 isn't bad at all. Surprised the heck out of me. Defiantly attainable.

When you put the teleconverter on it how much more do you get? I have a problem of wanting the close up of a macro using the telephoto on a bird flying high

Dogdots/Mary

3n-out

Mary,

With the 1.4X on my 100-400 on my Canon 30D I think the reach is somewhere around 620mm. I could use some help in the conversion but it is a respectable image that comes off this configuration. I think for the amature getting reach like this for under 1500.00 the pictures are very acceptable. Then again, You could spend 8,000.00+ on a prime 600mm. I'm not even sure my back would be able to walk around with that beast of a lens.

If your looking for reach the Sigma 500 or "Bigma" may be the better choice. But I prefer canon lenses and have never owned any other brand. I figure that is the best route for me. Plus - nothing like a white lens in public.

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

Mary,

With the 1.4X on my 100-400 on my Canon 30D I think the reach is somewhere around 620mm. I could use some help in the conversion but it is a respectable image that comes off this configuration. I think for the amature getting reach like this for under 1500.00 the pictures are very acceptable. Then again, You could spend 8,000.00+ on a prime 600mm. I'm not even sure my back would be able to walk around with that beast of a lens.

If your looking for reach the Sigma 500 or "Bigma" may be the better choice. But I prefer canon lenses and have never owned any other brand. I figure that is the best route for me. Plus - nothing like a white lens in public.

Wow..620mm would be a big help My 70-300 is with the conversion. I'm thinking around 450ish maybe. I'd bust my back for the 600mm prime in a heart beat

I agree with you about Canon lenses. I love them. While I haven't tried any other kind I just feel comfortable with them. My 24-105L is my baby for now.

Is the Sigma clear wide open? Never herard of the Sigma 500, but then again I'm always looking at Canon lenses.

----Mary

3n-out

Dogdots wrote:

Wow..620mm would be a big help My 70-300 is with the conversion. I'm thinking around 450ish maybe. I'd bust my back for the 600mm prime in a heart beat

I agree with you about Canon lenses. I love them. While I haven't tried any other kind I just feel comfortable with them. My 24-105L is my baby for now.

Is the Sigma clear wide open? Never herard of the Sigma 500, but then again I'm always looking at Canon lenses.

----Mary

Mary,

I have seen some wonderful photos taken with the Bigma Sigma. I have never owned one though so can't speak directly about its performance. The price isn't bad though - somewhere around the 1000 range for 500mm. On a crop body that would give you slightly more. They make two - this one is a 50-500mm and The reviews of owners isn't bad. all for $1,000.00 Here is the link to BH

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/380686-USA/Sigma_736101_Zoom_Normal_Telephoto_50_500mm_f_4_0_6_3.html

The other one they make is a 170-500 and that one doesn't get as good a review.

Since I owned a teleconverter I went with the 100-400 Canon and I feel like I went the right way. I'm a sucker for telephoto lense and only own one prime. I'm a lazy photog - why move closer to the subject when I can bring the subject in. That's probably why I'll never be a Wedding photog...

Dogdots

3n-out wrote:

Mary,

I have seen some wonderful photos taken with the Bigma Sigma. I have never owned one though so can't speak directly about its performance. The price isn't bad though - somewhere around the 1000 range for 500mm. On a crop body that would give you slightly more. They make two - this one is a 50-500mm and The reviews of owners isn't bad. all for $1,000.00 Here is the link to BH

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/380686-USA/Sigma_736101_Zoom_Normal_Telephoto_50_500mm_f_4_0_6_3.html

The other one they make is a 170-500 and that one doesn't get as good a review.

Since I owned a teleconverter I went with the 100-400 Canon and I feel like I went the right way. I'm a sucker for telephoto lense and only own one prime. I'm a lazy photog - why move closer to the subject when I can bring the subject in. That's probably why I'll never be a Wedding photog...

Thanks for the link. Interesting read. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just try them all out to figure out which one you want to buy

I love telephoto lenses to. I'm just getting to old to be running around in a field or ditch to get a photo.

But I have been known to get to close sometimes using my telephoto. I've had horses nose butt my lens when I thought I was further away then I was I need a person with me to watch out for where I'm going as I'm looking thru my camera.

I did get a hawk in a shelterbelt eating its lunch one day. He let me just sit and snap away while he ate. I still wonder why he let me do that . If I had the 100-400L on my camera instead of my 70-300.....well it would have been a "WOW" photo as my lens gets funky if you open it around 275ish to 300.

Do you ever use your 100-400 on landscape? I was reading where that is all this one photographer uses.

Dogdots/Mary

dmmattix

Dogdots wrote:

Thanks for the link. Interesting read. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just try them all out to figure out which one you want to buy

I love telephoto lenses to. I'm just getting to old to be running around in a field or ditch to get a photo.

But I have been known to get to close sometimes using my telephoto. I've had horses nose butt my lens when I thought I was further away then I was I need a person with me to watch out for where I'm going as I'm looking thru my camera.

I did get a hawk in a shelterbelt eating its lunch one day. He let me just sit and snap away while he ate. I still wonder why he let me do that . If I had the 100-400L on my camera instead of my 70-300.....well it would have been a "WOW" photo as my lens gets funky if you open it around 275ish to 300.

Do you ever use your 100-400 on landscape? I was reading where that is all this one photographer uses.

Dogdots/Mary

Mary,

I really like using the telephoto for landscape but maybe that is because it is a new option for me.

One lense that does not get that much attention is the Sigma 80-400 OS (Optically stablized) lense for $999. I got it because I could spend around $1000 and the 100-400 was around $1400. I had to wait around 3 weeks to get one due to backorder. I guess that is one indication of how good of a value this lense is. I really like mine but like the 100-400 it weighs a bit but I just have gotten used to it.

Regards

Mike

3n-out

Dogdots wrote:

Thanks for the link. Interesting read. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to just try them all out to figure out which one you want to buy

I love telephoto lenses to. I'm just getting to old to be running around in a field or ditch to get a photo.

But I have been known to get to close sometimes using my telephoto. I've had horses nose butt my lens when I thought I was further away then I was I need a person with me to watch out for where I'm going as I'm looking thru my camera.

I did get a hawk in a shelterbelt eating its lunch one day. He let me just sit and snap away while he ate. I still wonder why he let me do that . If I had the 100-400L on my camera instead of my 70-300.....well it would have been a "WOW" photo as my lens gets funky if you open it around 275ish to 300.

Do you ever use your 100-400 on landscape? I was reading where that is all this one photographer uses.

Dogdots/Mary

Mary,

Boy do I wish you could try before you buy. The best we get here is to try it in the store. Now if you buy it you can bring it back after you try it but it is for in store credit only so you have be be sure you want to spend your money before you walk out the door with it.

I have never done any landscapes with my 100-400. I have however taken sunset shots with my 70-200L. Come to think about it, I shoot more with the 70-200L then any other lens I have. I'm very happy with that lens and I don't think there is one better on the market. It is expensive but the pictures never disappoint me and with a little "or alot" of photoshopping the images are just simply amazing.

I used the 100-400 when I'm shooting at the zoo or animals. I have taken some portraits or hrmmm - "Pool side shoots" because I don't want to get splashed and it worked really well there. I haven't shot a whole lot with it but when I head on vacation next week for holidays I'll be sure pull her out and shoot a whole lot.

John.....

Dogdots

dmmattix wrote:

Mary,

I really like using the telephoto for landscape but maybe that is because it is a new option for me.

One lense that does not get that much attention is the Sigma 80-400 OS (Optically stablized) lense for $999. I got it because I could spend around $1000 and the 100-400 was around $1400. I had to wait around 3 weeks to get one due to backorder. I guess that is one indication of how good of a value this lense is. I really like mine but like the 100-400 it weighs a bit but I just have gotten used to it.

Regards

Mike

Thanks for the lead to this lens. I just checked it out and it did get good reviews---I will have to seriously look at this one. And being able to save money is always nice. But to be able to save money and get a good lens is the big plus.

Backorder is a good indication of a product that is in demand.

Thanks for the information on this lens. I must not close my mind to the other lenses that are out there

Dogdots/Mary