Fake Tilt in Magazines/Ads

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Kevin Neilson, May 4, 2004.

  1. The talk about shift lenses reminded me of a trend I think I've noticed. It
    seems that in every magazine I see, there are a lot of photographs and
    advertisements that use this sort of 'fake tilt'. It almost looks like a
    large format camera was used to tilt the focal plane, but when you look at
    it, it's really just that part of the image has been blurred in software.
    I'm not sure what the point is. It looks bad. I guess it's trendy and
    cool. It seems to be used a lot in people photographs where the head/face
    is in focus and the rest of the body blurred. Anybody else notice this, or
    am I imagining things?
    -Kevin
     
    Kevin Neilson, May 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Kevin Neilson

    Gordon Moat Guest

    Bad usage of the newest PhotoShop CS. Every time Adobe adds some crazy filter,
    it gets over used right out of the box, and usually by people who should know
    better. Of course, they probably think it does not look fake to the average
    person, not realizing that many average consumers are quite savvy to that sort
    of thing.
     
    Gordon Moat, May 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Kevin Neilson

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    It is a "technique" being pushed by all the idiot magazines (Photoshop
    User etc) who are teaching all the dumb dumbs how to do this to supposedly
    focus the attention on the subject. They are claiming that it makes the
    picture look like the shallow dof of a long lens, but the examples in the
    mags look like shite - so one has to assume the nummies who take up the
    style have about the same quality of eye as the Phoobahs who write the
    articles.
    One of the problems with computers is that people with no artistic
    qualifications take up design occupations and are then actually hired by
    other people who's only qualification as an art director is that they know
    how to use Photoshop to change a colour shot to B/W. We are living in the
    age of really bad graphics and it will get much worse before it gets better.
     
    Tony Spadaro, May 4, 2004
    #3
  4. Kevin Neilson

    Alan Browne Guest

    Not sure about the effect you mention... is it just selective focus?

    In Photoshop there is a tool for perspective correction which works
    pretty well. It does not result in more or less blur. One needs to be
    careful to always 'compress' the subjects and avoid 'stretching' it.

    Here is a before and after of the same image. (I didn't chase this to
    the end, just trying it out...also more care to have the film plane
    perfectly vertical at shoot time would have helped.).

    http://www.aliasimages.com/images/ManoirLorraineNonCorr.jpg
    http://www.aliasimages.com/images/ManoirLorrainePersCorr.jpg

    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, May 4, 2004
    #4
  5. Kevin Neilson

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, May 4, 2004
    #5
  6. Of course they get overused.

    Reminds me of a Comdex I had to attend in the late 1980s, when Amigas
    still existed. There was a video card for Amiga called Video Toaster.
    They had a booth with a video they had commissioned to promote it.

    It was Penn and Teller lecturing, with illustrations, "All the tacky
    and tasteless things you should avoid doing with the Video Toaster."
    Or something to that effect. It was hilarious, and included all the
    optical printer effects typical of 1930s movies.



    Rodney Myrvaagnes Opinionated old geezer

    Brutal dictators are routinely reelected by 90+%
    margins. Only in a truly advanced democracy can
    one win an election by a negative 600,000 votes.
     
    Rodney Myrvaagnes, May 4, 2004
    #6
  7. Kevin Neilson

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    It seems to be used a lot in people photographs where the head/face is in
    focus and the rest of the body blurred.

    It's called de-focus control, it is not done in software. Specific lenses
    are designed to achieve this effect such as the Nikon 135mm F2 D/DC.
     
    Joseph Kewfi, May 4, 2004
    #7
  8. What, like this?

    http://www.btinternet.com/~mcsalty/martin/marte.jpg

    Took me 60 seconds including "save for web", and i'm sure I was more subtle
    with it than I could have been ;-)
     
    Martin Francis, May 5, 2004
    #8
  9. Kevin Neilson

    Bandicoot Guest

    message [SNIP]
    Oh, now I see. Pictures of fake tiLts in magazines....


    ;-)


    Peter
     
    Bandicoot, May 5, 2004
    #9
  10. That's kind of what I'm talking about. The eye and part of the turtleneck,
    both on different planes, yet both are sharp. So it's obviously not a
    shallow DOF. Other parts of the face are on the same plane as the eye but
    are heavily blurred. Man, this looks bad, but no worse than what the pros
    in the mags are doing.
    -Kevin
     
    Kevin Neilson, May 5, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.