Playing with some new presets from +Trey Ratcliff …. Interesting stuff… – Even more interesting when you tweak them as needed for your own images…. LR5 well LR4 for that matter and presets really are starting to make me rethink workflow for the most part
I don't use PS much, but I do have some use for it. But there is so much you can do with LR it is amazing. The new tools in LR5 are wonderful and I am enjoying it a lot. But there are still maybe 5 to 10% of my images that still round trip to PS and then back to LR.
Ah sorry, what I meant was that it's very hard to do skin retouching in LR while at the same time retaining texture (as I think might be the case here, IMHO). Hence the troll bit. It depends on the talent though, some people actually prefer this look and feel, and I've been asked for it before. Chalk it up to personal preference? Again, don't mean to step on toes!
+Vee Ess you really feel Photoshop removes originality… Vs adds originality…… So you are saying a true creative photographer needs to make no edits and only capture what they see in the view finder….
Well, Brent we have two kinds of photographers…..and I say this after looking at your work for quite some time…..one catagory is the one that takes it as a hobby….in the business of taking a pic and by some means making it look good and presenting it to an audience, and it does not matter how much we alter the intrinsic value of the subject as long as it looks good (read fashion photography…..), which also is respectable as its object is not to present the subject but, to make it appeal to the senses in a particular way….Andrea Aiclawen's close capture of 'lips' are a beautiful example and I admit it was projected on a wall of my bedroom for weeks…. the second is your catagory of artist/technical photographers, one the where creativity starts from the choice of the subject itself but, once it is identified the purity of the character is essentially preserved. The beauty of the photo is not in its looking good but, in the truth of its presentation. The is the genre of very serious photographers…..you are perhaps one of them…..in this line people sometimes try to experiment with different techniques to present a thought but, they do not fiddle with the basic character of the presentation…..Olav Folland tries such things and, how far one succeeds is a different matter all together. What I feel is that the beauty should lie in the truth of the subject and its most honest presentation rather than its modified avataar that is artificial…..a lion's eyes should not have colored lenses or liner….its beauty lies in the fear that they can put in our hearts….the same argument goes for paintings too……example Leonardo's works….. so, finally I feel for the likes of your calibre it is felt that photoshopping cannot do justice….. I apologise for taking so much of your time with a rather long opinion. I hope I did not disturb you too much. Finally, to earn a buck….one can do anything that is required but, for your calibre there is no need for photoshopping as its the essence of the spirit that comes out through your viewfinder , creating beauty for the subject…..and probably magic for us all.Best regards.
+Vee Ess not a waste of time.. but a very interesting problem and discussion.. especially right now with where photography is…
I think for me as a hobbyist for the most part – I do not care or have to care what I do.. I can post a pile of crap image or an image that everyone seems to love and either way it does not really matter in the bigger picture for me.. I still eat and have a roof over my head..
This would be totally different if I actually had to make money in photography and my hat is off to those that can actually take the time and effort to create a great image using all aspects of their abilities and those of make up artists and wardrobe people and those that do all those jobs better than I could ever..
I have in my mind always the annoying issue of spending money to create images that are better technically.. this image is a good example. I could have used better wardrobe, better lighting, better makeup and hair, heck even paid for a "better" or more perfect example of human form model..
But instead I opted to use no makeup artist – model did her own, and her own wardrobe and I just pulled out the lighting I sort of knew how to use, why is because I rarely have time to experiment or learn, let alone arrange for all these pieces of the puzzle to come together on the same day…
This is a huge issue for me as I want to produce high quality images, but tend to run out of time, and in turn I need to turn to the creativity I can pull out of other tools that I can later spend time with…
I have been one here to never try to hide the fact that I am "cheating" was this shot exposed perfectly initially out of the camera.. no… do I mess with just about every image I shoot.. yes… hard not too these days when you shoot RAW thou..
Would I love the time and ability to arrange for the next level of my photography, I sure would love that.. but till I become independently wealthy that will not happen…
Will that set me back and in turn cause my development as a photographer take years instead of months – yes
This topic in general I think is one of the largest issues hobbyist photographers, no matter how good they seem to be, have when they try to advance their careers, because the jump from or into full time photography that can support any kind of realistic lifestyle has never been more difficult..
This would be a great topics for TWIP with +Frederick Van Johnson – to have on a few hobbyist photographers to talk about the issues behind trying to advance as a hobbyist while maintaining a full time career.
Brent I am more interested in the capability aspect…..even if its a hobby…like it is one for me….we got to strive for the best…commensurate with capabilities.
+Ryan MacLean I definitely do not strive for that… thou many I talk too – non photographers…. believe that the images I make are right out of the camera.. go figure…its all about the audience you play too..
+Brent Burzycki it's the feel of the picture that I look at first then I look at what I need to do to make it happen lighting the composition the framing. I do look at the metadata to see the type of lens exposure and such but is the picture that I look at first.
Can't agree more, +Brent Burzycki – I'm simply too lazy to shoot film these days but still like the aesthetic… which leads me to faded blacks, muted highlights and grain.
+Gregg Havens but that is because you and I are photographers… most viewers do not even know meta data exists…..now will it change their perception of the image…
I've never used Photoshop, so no.
I don't use PS much, but I do have some use for it. But there is so much you can do with LR it is amazing. The new tools in LR5 are wonderful and I am enjoying it a lot. But there are still maybe 5 to 10% of my images that still round trip to PS and then back to LR.
Yeah when it comes to skin and retaining texture, we still need PS 🙂
Great tones, though, and great shot.
I'll take my troll ass elsewhere, sorry +Brent Burzycki!
Wait was that somehow trolling…
Ah sorry, what I meant was that it's very hard to do skin retouching in LR while at the same time retaining texture (as I think might be the case here, IMHO). Hence the troll bit. It depends on the talent though, some people actually prefer this look and feel, and I've been asked for it before. Chalk it up to personal preference?
Again, don't mean to step on toes!
Yes.. And I totally agree..
Looks good!
Photoshopping robs an image of its originality….. I think we are focussing on the purity of subject as the basis of serious photography….
Composition in light. Looking at the details will help us amateurs become better photographers.
+Vee Ess you really feel Photoshop removes originality… Vs adds originality…… So you are saying a true creative photographer needs to make no edits and only capture what they see in the view finder….
+Gregg Havens when you say details are you saying meta data or actual details in the visible image…
Well, Brent we have two kinds of photographers…..and I say this after looking at your work for quite some time…..one catagory is the one that takes it as a hobby….in the business of taking a pic and by some means making it look good and presenting it to an audience, and it does not matter how much we alter the intrinsic value of the subject as long as it looks good (read fashion photography…..), which also is respectable as its object is not to present the subject but, to make it appeal to the senses in a particular way….Andrea Aiclawen's close capture of 'lips' are a beautiful example and I admit it was projected on a wall of my bedroom for weeks…. the second is your catagory of artist/technical photographers, one the where creativity starts from the choice of the subject itself but, once it is identified the purity of the character is essentially preserved. The beauty of the photo is not in its looking good but, in the truth of its presentation. The is the genre of very serious photographers…..you are perhaps one of them…..in this line people sometimes try to experiment with different techniques to present a thought but, they do not fiddle with the basic character of the presentation…..Olav Folland tries such things and, how far one succeeds is a different matter all together. What I feel is that the beauty should lie in the truth of the subject and its most honest presentation rather than its modified avataar that is artificial…..a lion's eyes should not have colored lenses or liner….its beauty lies in the fear that they can put in our hearts….the same argument goes for paintings too……example Leonardo's works….. so, finally I feel for the likes of your calibre it is felt that photoshopping cannot do justice….. I apologise for taking so much of your time with a rather long opinion. I hope I did not disturb you too much. Finally, to earn a buck….one can do anything that is required but, for your calibre there is no need for photoshopping as its the essence of the spirit that comes out through your viewfinder , creating beauty for the subject…..and probably magic for us all.Best regards.
+Vee Ess not a waste of time.. but a very interesting problem and discussion.. especially right now with where photography is…
I think for me as a hobbyist for the most part – I do not care or have to care what I do.. I can post a pile of crap image or an image that everyone seems to love and either way it does not really matter in the bigger picture for me.. I still eat and have a roof over my head..
This would be totally different if I actually had to make money in photography and my hat is off to those that can actually take the time and effort to create a great image using all aspects of their abilities and those of make up artists and wardrobe people and those that do all those jobs better than I could ever..
I have in my mind always the annoying issue of spending money to create images that are better technically.. this image is a good example. I could have used better wardrobe, better lighting, better makeup and hair, heck even paid for a "better" or more perfect example of human form model..
But instead I opted to use no makeup artist – model did her own, and her own wardrobe and I just pulled out the lighting I sort of knew how to use, why is because I rarely have time to experiment or learn, let alone arrange for all these pieces of the puzzle to come together on the same day…
This is a huge issue for me as I want to produce high quality images, but tend to run out of time, and in turn I need to turn to the creativity I can pull out of other tools that I can later spend time with…
I have been one here to never try to hide the fact that I am "cheating" was this shot exposed perfectly initially out of the camera.. no… do I mess with just about every image I shoot.. yes… hard not too these days when you shoot RAW thou..
Would I love the time and ability to arrange for the next level of my photography, I sure would love that.. but till I become independently wealthy that will not happen…
Will that set me back and in turn cause my development as a photographer take years instead of months – yes
This topic in general I think is one of the largest issues hobbyist photographers, no matter how good they seem to be, have when they try to advance their careers, because the jump from or into full time photography that can support any kind of realistic lifestyle has never been more difficult..
This would be a great topics for TWIP with +Frederick Van Johnson – to have on a few hobbyist photographers to talk about the issues behind trying to advance as a hobbyist while maintaining a full time career.
There are ways of using PS so that it's completely unnoticeable, which I strive for, personally 🙂
Brent I am more interested in the capability aspect…..even if its a hobby…like it is one for me….we got to strive for the best…commensurate with capabilities.
+Ryan MacLean I definitely do not strive for that… thou many I talk too – non photographers…. believe that the images I make are right out of the camera.. go figure…its all about the audience you play too..
+Brent Burzycki it's the feel of the picture that I look at first then I look at what I need to do to make it happen lighting the composition the framing. I do look at the metadata to see the type of lens exposure and such but is the picture that I look at first.
Can't agree more, +Brent Burzycki – I'm simply too lazy to shoot film these days but still like the aesthetic… which leads me to faded blacks, muted highlights and grain.
+Gregg Havens but that is because you and I are photographers… most viewers do not even know meta data exists…..now will it change their perception of the image…