Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted thanks for contributing again. I'll be framing my Ted "Very nice quick casual shot well done Hoppy!" That was it! A cool photograph. The result was supposed to be a casual portrait, just as it was taken in a few seconds. It's also supposed to look artless but seldom is, for me. So I try to make a shot with decent potential better. Give me forty years or so to catch you. Of course, I'll be past ninety and you'll be too grumpy to talk to! Hey I'm posting a fair bit for a young fella and also spending lots of time in both darkroom and photoshop as part of the hobby. Photoshop is one of my great photo passions as well and as you said that side can become consuming too. Philippe did pick where I had been too heavy handed. Now let me say that my end products are entirely prints and entirely controlled and produced by me. The posts are of course a much reduced quality version of the prints that I can hold in my hand. So running the print past my wife she picked the red de-saturated skin tone and my 12 yr old picked the overly bright eye whites. My wife is famous for her faint praise! See her in my gallery (shot from the shadowish side). I stand judged and found guilty. Anyhoo, check the new one. I think it's nicer and I've learnt some more. Ps uncapped M in hand today and shot film by available light, looking for that shadow side. Cheers Apprentice Hoppy -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Ted Grant Sent: Thursday, 14 September 2006 14:44 To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] hoppys casual portrait revisited Hoppy showed: Subject: [Leica] hoppys casual portrait revisited > Folks following comment by Philippe, I've revisited this portrait. > > I think it is an improvement. > > Less digital Nocterising and some other tweaks. > > When folks spot your alterations readily you've done them poorly, I > > think. > > I shall leave the original up for a short while in case anyone would > > like to compare. http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/hoppyman/analog/family/Casual+_portrait_+ver+2.jpg.html http://tinyurl.com/g27yd Hoppy, I haven't got a clue what Philippe was talking about, but obviously he has a far better eye and screen size to find anything wrong with the original posted picture. When it came on screen first time I figured.... "Very nice quick casual shot well done Hoppy!" That was it! A cool photograph. Nothing wrong with it! Now yer screwing around with it because of this whole digital crap thing . One question........ "How does a print look, say 11X17? Now a print, not the screen, hold it at the correct viewing distance for that size and ask yourself, " is this a good photograph?" You can't come back with anything else but... "Yep neat picture!" period Never mind looking for all the "effects things." Then show it to a few people who don't have a clue about digital smigital and ask them what they think as a print? And a photograph? Then come back and tell us your findings. I'm giving a lecture next week about digital and what the hell it's doing.. title? "Ease up on the number effects and come back to photography!" And right here with your photo is a prime example of what's happening supposedly making it better. Or whatever the hell people try to do, rather than having a neat picture and leave it alone. Sure we all make "digital adjustments" that are simple and straight forward. Mine are 99% whatever happens on "Automatic!" ;-) If I don't like it, I change it, but dang few times. You've got a photograph entitled "Casual portrait", looks good on the screen without question when I saw it the first time. Whether you had messed with it before the first posting who cares because it looked fine. In other words what people don't know doesn't matter, do they like the finished product and will they pay you for it! Very handsomely! ;-) So I'm surprised what all the extra back and forth is about and why you're still fiddling with a fine picture. I've gone back and forth a couple dozen times trying to see what's wrong with the first posting compared to whatever you did on the re-post? One thing without question with digital, I'm lumping everything from camera, printer, the fixing up and how people look at finished prints into one pot! It appears to be constantly floundering far more about numbers and special corrective effects rather than the content and how good the photograph itself is!! I know there'll be all kinds of re-butts, however I'm getting truly fed-up with people who do nothing but constantly talk numbers and never appear to be looking at how beautiful the photograph is. Sure it's a learning curve for all of us, as wet tray was. Or maybe it's me not getting the usual darkroom dose of fresh fixer! ;-) So endth the rant? bit....ing" ted _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information