Hello folks,
back to the themes …
This time a Big Horn treated in a creative ? way .
By thinking i will get not that many positive feedback , due to the extreme processing , i still take the chance .
What are the critical eyes in here seeing ? From my POV, please do not see it as a nature document , see it as creative adventure . The effect is called "Bleach Bypass", originally an old darkroom technique .
Canon EOS 1Dx
EF 200 - 400 IS L at 400 mm
Tripod
FF
F8 ; Iso 400 ; 1/400 sec
Processed in Photo Ninja and PS CC ; used very long steps in PS to achieve this effect and made use of a basic "Bleach Bypass" filter from a plugin.
Hope you like it a bit , at least one or two positive comments, please. If not , ok too, as always i can stand your critiques.
Cheers Andreas
Last edited by Steve Kaluski; 03-18-2014 at 03:54 AM.
Andreas,
I have to say, I like the original much better.
Just eliminate the blue light above and retain the soft light quality of the face and I much
prefer that to the highly processed one.
Hi Andreas, I've added 'March theme' to the title as it helps us when we trawl through the images for selection.
Can you tell me why you chose to go this route and the thinking behind it. The reason I ask is that so many people change an image because the software allows them to do so, but they have no idea why they are going it, apart from, 'it looks different'. I just like to know the rational & thinking behind the change and why you chose this method, its just 's the viewer can understand.
cheers
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Hi Andreas - I'm sure you knew which camp I would be in when you posted this. Sorry but it's much too contrasty and harsh for me and looks over-processed IMHO. I much prefer the ooc post with a few minor tweaks to optimize the image. I'm curious to hear your answer to Steve's question.
Hello Dan , Steve and Rachel
apart from your opinion , which i wanted to hear or read, i did this because i wanted to do. The reason was ,i did that in the old film days with slide films or BW myself with a friend who had the better knowledge and the equipment to do so. By that time i did not photograph nature as much as i did later , i was doing other stuff.I do not know how many of you guys know about film processing in the old days, (BLEACH BYPASS; CROSS PROCESSING slide /negative ; negative /slide etc ) .They never look like a "normal" processed image, and it is not the target to look like that. So i took the freedom to to do it digitally.
As i said in the beginning , do not see it as a nature document , properly developed , just see it as "creative way" going to extreme , like it or not.Leave your thoughts , good or bad , as always i appreciate that.
I could have processed the frame , the normal way , but i did not want.The major thought was getting an EVIL look and from my POV it works quite good with these extremes ,i could have gone B/W but i wanted to stay in color.
Once i remember Peter Delaney said , he is not going for a nature document , or producing what he saw when he took his frames, he is going for that what he likes or his customers.So he is taking his freedom and i am taking mine.
Rachel - i knew before hand what your thoughts are , almost 100%, but should i avoid posting my vision of an extreme processed image , just because you say it looks over processed ? Which it is , actually , no question.
As i said to Gabriela the day before yesterday, in the end i am doing this for me, for nobody else, i post it here to get thoughts of others ………………in the end it has to please me . I can follow your thoughts and suggestions , but i do not have to.
And all you out there are having the freedom to like it or not.
I think this an image , like it or not, there is no gray, just pure white or black .
Steve - i thought you know or remember that i am going to extremes from time to time, because sometimes i am becoming bored of looking at properly exposed /developed /processed images , even in here, where the level of imagery is quite high .
I am missing Mr D., better said his images , because he is setting sharp points with his frames from to time, like it or not, he is doing better than me , by far, but i would like to be able to produce the same quality as him, but sadly i am far away.
Same as i said to Rachel , should i just stop , or explain why i went this way ?
I do not understand your point about the software, i did it not because of the software , 90% was made in PS, not in the filter that gave a very basic "Bleach Bypass" effect.
Hope this explains my thoughts and still hope there will be someone out there who likes it a bit…………….. LOL. If not i am ok with it.
And i leave it to you guys to post just well processed images all the time , and not go off the beaten path ? !!??
There is a reason why i am here, just love this place .
Steve - i forgot , it is not created by "Wanging Sliders in Software" i had that plan and it was build up by system ………… not plan less .A lot of masking and brushing is involved.
I am hoping you understand my points , not thinking you have to like it.
Hi Andreas - never a problem to post different takes and to be creative but you also may want to consider posting these more "creative" and "extreme" processed images in OOTB. I think what Steve and I were looking for was what you were hoping to achieve and you said it in your above post but not in the OP. You were going for an "EVIL" look. That puts the post and processing in context which allows the viewer to offer critique and suggestions with that objective/context in mind. Without that context, we are going to presume that someone posting is trying to present a pleasing nature image. Some are trying to present a commercially viable image.
From the OP I had no idea that you were going for an "evil" look. I know you like contrast and thought you just wanted an even more amped up contrasty look. We tend to disagree on the amount of contrast but always do so respectfully and sometimes I agree and add a bit more contrast and sometimes you agree that you've gone a bit too far . It's all part of the give and take of a critique environment. Had I known you were going for an evil look, I would have said that I actually felt you didn't go far enough. I think there's probably more you can do to the face to give it an evil feel. It seems that you have gone farther with the body than the face. It may just be that the sheep's slight smile doesn't really lend itself to going evil.
Dear Rachel,
from my POV this image is not for OOTB, simply it is just pushed in color and contrast in a specific way , for OOTB there should be other stuff done , again at least for me. Just my 2 cents .
In the OP i stated to "NOT" see it as "nature document properly processed " , instead seeing this as a "creative adventure", i thought i should not declare that i wanted to achieve an "EVIL" look, i left it to the viewer…………. what the viewer see in it.
I did not want to present a commercial image , just had fun processing the effect i wanted to achieve .
Do you know images of the "DEVIL " , with horns and looking like a Ram, i had that in my mind, regardless this is a female "DEVIL" ……LOL.
re : disregard, why should i disregard your thoughts and suggestions, i respect them but maybe not follow them , just my 2 cents.
Please feel free and post an RP with your "EVIL" vision of this , give me an idea, would be nice.Not sure if you can handle such evil stuff………… just laugh while i write this.
Ps: If you go into a gallery and look at art, is it not often the case that you ask yourself , what is the artist asking for , or showing the viewer.I see it here , too. Sometimes i would like to leave it to the viewer what he is able to see, or what he /she wants to see.
I never saw a comment on Peter`s images from you or others, he should post his images in OOTB . Why? He is going to extremes as well , as per normal standard in here.
Hoping for a creative answer with big regards , Andreas
Among all the images I browse through daily but don't look at properly or which which leave me indifferent, some occasionally stand out with an impact that overwhelms me and forces me to take my time to view. Those images possess a quality I call "beauty", even though they do not always involve cuteness or any of the obvious features one normally associates with a "beautiful image". I just like them because they appeal to me, they appeal to that which I call my "aesthetic sense". Your Big Horn Sheep in Bleach Bypass is one such example. I was drawn to this image not because it belongs to my pal Andreas, and not because I thought to myself "what is Andreas up to now?". For me, your image has "punch", and I admit I do like your adventurous ways of processing. I love the OP, the only thing that slightly puzzles me is the colour of the eyes - slightly going towards pink and I would have preferred them to lean towards gold, or golden-brown (but that's just me). Love your playfulness, I think you have the talent and knowledge to be artful and reach the extremes
...and this was my creative answer to your creative endeavour, now I would like to ask you "what's next?"
Dear Gabriela,
hooray there is a person out there who likes it , at least 99 percent of it………………. loving you, meaning your opinion about the frame, sorry Andre.
Thanks for your kind words………….that inspires me to go ahead , for whatever is coming next, i do not know exactly.
Re eyes - i had the coloration (close) to your thoughts but decide to make them more visible by a different color.
Inspiration - you inspired me to make something out of the "nice" way, remember our last e-mail, you talked about that you posted the PCG in Avian (did not comment) and you felt uncomfortable by not knowing what people would say………………. do not think what people would say, just do it .
But you have to be able to stand critique , and you can , i feel . So no fear is needed , just post regardless what others would say.
At the moment i am working on a real Velvia Effect , not a very soft one like i posted with the other Big Horn image.
I revisited some of Peter`s images , and must say ,meanwhile i just really like his work, and i just sucked up his words about creativity and not showing (all the time ) the real world.In 2014 we are riding horses on a daily basis , or have wooden tires do we ?
Now it is becoming to go too much off topic.
Anyhow thanks , and start to play, but just try to avoid plan less "Wanging Sliders in Software". Steve would say know your tools , at least some parts of it.
Hi Andreas, I will try to keep it clear and simple, but this to me is where dialog in 'speaking' is the way to go, as we can exchange/express views instantly, where tying is rather one way and can, at times, be misinterpreted. Ss we can read into things sometimes in a different way, as you and I know in exchanges we have.
Anytime I ask, or pose a question to anyone, all I am trying to do is understand: the concept, the rational, the thinking behind the image, and ultimately, why they chose to express the image in a particular way and in doing so, what has that particular process, medium, effect done... has it actually enhanced the image or not? As I say, this is just my take & understanding, however I have seen truck loads of images that have been 'changed' thinking it has progressed the image in a positive way, however all that has happened is that someone has utilised a particular 'option' in a software programme, applied it thinking it has really enhanced the image, but sadly, more often it just looks like an effect has been applied adding nothing to the overall image and at times, been a step back. I guess it's my background, if I understand the problem, or what I want to achieve at the end of the day, only then can I cherry pick the right route and course of action to take to achieve the end goal.
This may also be bolster by a comment Chas made some time ago, (this is my recollection, not an actual quote), 'in shooting in the field I may shoot in a particular way, as I know I can retrieve, correct and/or manipulate the image in PP to achieve the final look & feel to the image'.
Don't get me wrong, it's great to explore and see what can be achieved in this world of digital photography, as it's easy to get stale & formulaic, hence choosing a theme like this. Having other thoughts & ideas expressed helps to keep the wheels evolving. I also agree that images for OOTB really need to embrace the title.
Rachel also touch on an area in another thread, we ALL see & interpret things in a different way, just because I like it, or do not like it does not mean it's good or bad, it is just my take, however this is why in feedback it's KEY to explain why or why not an image works, as it's oh so easy to say, 'it doesn't work', how helpful is that? It means zero, as the 'poster' is left not knowing why. BTW this is a general comment.
cheers
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Firstly I'm not in favour of posting two images of the same image side by side, reason being is that people will compare and you will not get an accurate feedback on the initial image and as the feedback is about the OP I may feel it needs to go, but posted at the end of the thread later, as the critique is purely about the first image.
The OP is very contrasty and has a 'graphic' feel IMHO. I'm not a lover of the heavy black at the top, as I find it dominant, however it is in someway in keeping with 'contrasty' feel. The bleach bypass has created some nice and consistent colour/tones, albeit almost in an monochromatic colour. The medium used has lost a lot of the subtle detail the original has, but then we are not comparing the two, but the approach is not about detail, to me it's more impact & grittiness. I like the 'inquisitive' look and the HA really enforces this, however perhaps a little off the foot may help?. I would also tone down slightly the hotter whites of the nose. The two grass stems need to go from the chest, an easy fix on the second version.
Not sure if ColourEfex will give you more options within this approach?
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Hi Steve,
i am not getting you wrong , i am fine with your opinion. Most of the times i agree with your thoughts , observations and suggestions, but not…….. always.
I just wanted it this way , i did not want to make the image better in a conventional way. As i said , i had that look in my mind , and i made it possible for me . Not for others. And if you think i did not achieved this effect , that i wanted to, go ahead and tell a better way. But if you would try in this case , asking me, Andreas just make it conventional with some good tonal range , contrast , colors etc. I will say no Steve, this not what i had in my mind when i "improved " the image.
And if you "feel" , one has not improved the image , sadly made it worse, you can tell . But still it is in this case , subjective, i think due to the more "ART LOOK".
Again i agree with you for the conventional way of processing .
I think when it comes to Art , Rules or thoughts differ a lot more amongst the community , the more you go to extremes the more you like or dislike , not much in between.
Hello Andreas, Rachel, Steve, and everyone following this conversation
It is late at night and I should be already in bed, yet I find this quite stimulating and mind awakening in many ways (I bet you are enjoying this, Andreas). Let me go further and describe it as exciting, if I may... Some years back I used to have these lengthy talks with one of my very special friends over the phone, sometimes for hours on end. I was studying literature and she was doing a postgraduate degree in philosophy, we did share a lot of common ground but often ended up exploring unknown territories like art (and yes, photography). We often talked about beauty and ugliness, about harmony, about "embracing a certain work of art in a positive or negative way", andeven about enhancing a work of art in a way or another. We debated the issue till the wee hours of the morning, only to eventually agree that such values are relative
So no conclusions here, just "general comments" : I believe the photographer (Andreas), was trying to teach us to interpret what he has seen and captured through different eyes, to experiment his fantasies, to rediscover a rather banal subject within a new context. Therefore I was - and still am - quite taken with his image.
I truly appreciate Steve's desire to know what was the reasoning behind it, this would help me understand the intentions behind the creation. Otherwise, I shall surrender and plead tolerance, since I have already admitted to find this image quite beautiful, because it appeals to me in a way I cannot explain, because I myself like to play with colours from time to time, or just because (unlike Andreas) I lack the boldness to share with you those ideas of mine that emerge spontaneously from time to time
Hello Steve and Gabriela and all the others who follow this thread.
Gabriela - Yes i love this kind of discussion, ,fighting hard but fair for my RIGHTS and thoughts.
Steve - you are right , by saying not a good idea to post the original and the extreme one after the other , will avoid this in the future for a clearer mind of you guys..
Thank you for kind words and suggestions , as good as always, after your entry , i thought you will RIP this apart.
Re Bleach Bypass - in the "original" formula the HL and SH are either blown or plugged , so i already backed off on that effect . and i want to retain the effect , the area you talked about is not that important for the image.
Crop ok, can think about it, losing a bit from the bottom can not harm the image.
Approach is not the fine detail , yes you are right i did not want to show all the nice details that are in the original shot.
Still no NIK lover , do not use it………….. even it is pretty cheap now.
Thanks again for clarifying your thoughts
Andreas, reading between the lines I think we all are on the same hymn sheet, but perhaps more passionate in certain paragraphs of this story, if that makes sense? As you say, we are ALL here to learn from one another, and a thread like this I think is great, however not always possible on the majority of threads posted. 'Art/Photography' is very subjective and therefore hard at times to be 'independent/neutral' in our thoughts & comments.
Keep exploring and challenging the boundaries Andreas and remember - 'Rules are only there as guidelines and should never be considered as a straight jacket' quote Steve Kaluski.
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Steve,you hit the nail on the head with all you said, at least for me.
I am thinking to describe my thoughts about this ,as i can say this in my language ,but then i am reaching my limits in english.
I really enjoy this from time to time to fight with all of the people who follow certain threads, which are out of the "NORM" whether they are mine or from others.
If all the threads are like this , i would be limited to participate in all of them in the same way and intensity ,it is more time consuming than others and for me even more due to language barrier.Plus i am very slow in typing , just using two fingers to type. I am way better in processing,
I will make my way , where ever it will lead me to.
Cheers Andreas
Morning Andreas, a Forum IMHO is where we can exchange views, thoughts, ideas etc, and from those replies we are then able to distill from the feedback given. The views expressed are for you to agree with or disagree with, that is why, as you say we are all individuals, it would be very short lived if we all agreed with each other and we would never progress in our own journeys.
Look forward to the next forth coming series of images.
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
I said up thread a bit that if Andreas wanted to portray an "evil" sheep then I thought he could have taken it further. Andreas asked me to give my interpretation and sent me the raw to do so. I had a play with it last night. Converted in ACR and PP in CCPS. I went with a warmer version than Andreas and amped up the contrast through levels and curves and some selective burning and dodging. I wanted to emphasize the eyes and upped the reds there while reducing the yellows and brightened them through a screen adjustment. I darkened the bg and cloned out some blue spots there. I then took it into Nik and applied Detail Extractor at 5%. Finally, because I think the real obstacle to this being an "evil" ewe is the expression of the ewe, I did some cloning on the left side of the mouth as viewed to turn what looks like a smile into more of a smirk. After putting it aside overnight I decided to desaturate everything except the eyes. My final step was to resize and sharpen for web. I'm still not convinced it as an "evil" ewe though because of the mouth and expression.
While I had fun playing around with Andreas' image and I did so because he asked me to, the level of manipulation here is not something that I am comfortable with or would do to my own images. As most of you know, my goal with my own images is to present a realistic view of what I saw. There are exceptions with what I consider my fine art images such as a high key image, a silhouette or perhaps a b&w/toned image. I think the key in all cases is to disclose what has been done as Andreas did.
I still do think this would be appropriate to post in OOTB. The description of that forum is:
Not every image conforms to the so called "rules" of photography. This forum is dedicated to breaking out of the box of conformity. Post Avian, Wildlife, Macro/Flora, Landscapes and nature images with hand of man elements that will expose us to new ideas. This forum is for OOTB images modified or created using post processing techniques and / or images created entirely in camera, including toned, desaturated, hand colored and infra red etc.(emphasis added)
Andreas prefers to post it in Wildlife and I'll respect his choice. In any event it has given rise to a lively and good discussion.
Not wishing to cover old ground, this has been an exceeding good thread, as it has highlighted more our thoughts & views and may have provoked others to perhaps think how they tackle their own images in some small way?
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Hi Rachel,
thank you for your RP and good to hear that you had fun, even this is not your "normal" treatment of a wildlife shot.
These are really evil looking eyes…….
I do find your processing not as extreme as yourself maybe find it, except the eyes, they do look processed over the top from a normal POV.
The rest of the image has got the more or less original colors , became deeper and a lot more contrast and darkness.
You extracted some nice depth and detail with your PP.
My vision was different , less saturated , less color variation , more contrast.
Honestly i stick with mine , and i am sure you understand why .
Any how thank you and all the others who gave this thread some more life as usual. I still do find it sad that not more different people jump in and be part of it.
BTW - took some of my time and browsed in OOTB, more than i normally do, i feel even more being right by not posting this in there. Because i tweaked this image only in the tonal range and the coloration , in there you find all sorts of stuff, good , but not my cup!
It seems I am late to the really good discussions these days, Andreas .
For what it's worth: I prefer the contrast and feel of your OP to what Rachel has done (though I got a bit of a fright from those eyes, given the evil goat approach ). I don't like the cyan/green toning of it, which is possibly what you were going for? Having not shot film I'm not sure what this bleach look "should" look like...
Perhaps my ideal version is your OP, without the "cast" and with about 15-20% reduction in overall contrast.
Last edited by Morkel Erasmus; 03-20-2014 at 03:38 AM.
Big Horn Sheep in Bleach Bypass - (March Theme)
Reply With Quote
.
. Why? He is going to extremes as well , as per normal standard in here.
). Love your playfulness, I think you have the talent and knowledge to be artful and reach the extremes
.
