Starting the year

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014.

  1. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Jan 3, 2014
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >
    >> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg

    >
    >OK! Here it comes.
    >
    >Great shot! This I like.
    >So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.


    Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    too flat.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #3
  4. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:

    > On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>
    >>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>
    >>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg

    >>
    >> OK! Here it comes.
    >>
    >> Great shot! This I like.
    >> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.

    >
    > Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    > the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    > too flat.


    I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)

    --
    Regards,

    Savageduck
     
    Savageduck, Jan 3, 2014
    #4
  5. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >
    >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>>
    >>> OK! Here it comes.
    >>>
    >>> Great shot! This I like.
    >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.

    >>
    >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    >> too flat.

    >
    >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)


    The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    masking was done, though.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #5
  6. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 22:50:54 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    wrote:
    : On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    : <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    :
    : >On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >
    : >> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    : >>
    : >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    : >
    : >OK! Here it comes.
    : >
    : >Great shot! This I like.
    : >So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    :
    : Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    : the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    : too flat.

    Yeah, a little oversharpening to ring in the new year never hurt anybody. :^)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jan 3, 2014
    #6
  7. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:01:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    wrote:
    : On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    : <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    :
    : >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >
    : >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    : >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : >>
    : >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >>>
    : >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    : >>>>
    : >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    : >>>
    : >>> OK! Here it comes.
    : >>>
    : >>> Great shot! This I like.
    : >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    : >>
    : >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    : >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    : >> too flat.
    : >
    : >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)
    :
    : The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    : image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    : more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    : masking was done, though.

    The manipulation makes the picture look unnatural. And naturalism is sort of
    the hallmark of street photography, isn't it? But like the Duck, I rather like
    the way it came out. And the composition is impeccable.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jan 3, 2014
    #7
  8. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:37:23 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:01:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    >wrote:
    >: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    >: <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >:
    >: >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >: >
    >: >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    >: >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: >>
    >: >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >: >>>
    >: >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >: >>>>
    >: >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >: >>>
    >: >>> OK! Here it comes.
    >: >>>
    >: >>> Great shot! This I like.
    >: >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    >: >>
    >: >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    >: >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    >: >> too flat.
    >: >
    >: >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)
    >:
    >: The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    >: image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    >: more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    >: masking was done, though.
    >
    >The manipulation makes the picture look unnatural. And naturalism is sort of
    >the hallmark of street photography, isn't it? But like the Duck, I rather like
    >the way it came out. And the composition is impeccable.
    >

    There we have the essence of the post-processing choices. It's
    unnatural looking, but I like it.

    As far as naturalism being required in street photography, there are
    only two rules generally observed in this: never remove or add
    anything material to the scene in post, and never pose the subjects.

    Minor cloning-out of distractions is OK. Treatment of the image to
    exaggerate contrast aspects of the scene, as I have done, is OK.

    Of course, these "OK"s are not universally accepted as OK. We have
    purists in the genre who think that you present it strictly
    out-of-camera only. These people don't even accept cropping in post.
    They do allow desaturation because digitals capture in color and
    purists like b&w.

    I don't worry about the "rules", though. I don't remove or add
    anything material, and I declare it if I've asked the subjects to
    pose, but if feel that I can do what I want in post-processing.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #8
  9. Tony Cooper

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:09:30 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    wrote:
    : On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:37:23 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    :
    : >On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:01:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    : >wrote:
    : >: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    : >: <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : >:
    : >: >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >: >
    : >: >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    : >: >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : >: >>
    : >: >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    : >: >>>>
    : >: >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> OK! Here it comes.
    : >: >>>
    : >: >>> Great shot! This I like.
    : >: >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    : >: >>
    : >: >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    : >: >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    : >: >> too flat.
    : >: >
    : >: >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)
    : >:
    : >: The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    : >: image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    : >: more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    : >: masking was done, though.
    : >
    : >The manipulation makes the picture look unnatural. And naturalism is sort of
    : >the hallmark of street photography, isn't it? But like the Duck, I rather like
    : >the way it came out. And the composition is impeccable.
    : >
    : There we have the essence of the post-processing choices. It's
    : unnatural looking, but I like it.
    :
    : As far as naturalism being required in street photography, there are
    : only two rules generally observed in this: never remove or add
    : anything material to the scene in post, and never pose the subjects.
    :
    : Minor cloning-out of distractions is OK. Treatment of the image to
    : exaggerate contrast aspects of the scene, as I have done, is OK.
    :
    : Of course, these "OK"s are not universally accepted as OK. We have
    : purists in the genre who think that you present it strictly
    : out-of-camera only. These people don't even accept cropping in post.
    : They do allow desaturation because digitals capture in color and
    : purists like b&w.
    :
    : I don't worry about the "rules", though. I don't remove or add
    : anything material, and I declare it if I've asked the subjects to
    : pose, but if feel that I can do what I want in post-processing.

    The thing that baffles me in what you said above is how anyone, no matter how
    much of a purist, could object to cropping. From there, it's only a tiny step
    to requiring the use of a camera with a specified sensor size and aspect ratio
    and a lens of a specified focal length.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jan 3, 2014
    #9
  10. Tony Cooper

    philo  Guest

    philo , Jan 3, 2014
    #10
  11. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 12:40:51 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:09:30 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    >wrote:
    >: On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:37:23 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >:
    >: >On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:01:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    >: >wrote:
    >: >: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    >: >: <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: >:
    >: >: >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >: >: >
    >: >: >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    >: >: >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: >: >>
    >: >: >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >: >: >>>
    >: >: >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >: >: >>>>
    >: >: >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >: >: >>>
    >: >: >>> OK! Here it comes.
    >: >: >>>
    >: >: >>> Great shot! This I like.
    >: >: >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    >: >: >>
    >: >: >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    >: >: >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    >: >: >> too flat.
    >: >: >
    >: >: >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)
    >: >:
    >: >: The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    >: >: image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    >: >: more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    >: >: masking was done, though.
    >: >
    >: >The manipulation makes the picture look unnatural. And naturalism is sort of
    >: >the hallmark of street photography, isn't it? But like the Duck, I rather like
    >: >the way it came out. And the composition is impeccable.
    >: >
    >: There we have the essence of the post-processing choices. It's
    >: unnatural looking, but I like it.
    >:
    >: As far as naturalism being required in street photography, there are
    >: only two rules generally observed in this: never remove or add
    >: anything material to the scene in post, and never pose the subjects.
    >:
    >: Minor cloning-out of distractions is OK. Treatment of the image to
    >: exaggerate contrast aspects of the scene, as I have done, is OK.
    >:
    >: Of course, these "OK"s are not universally accepted as OK. We have
    >: purists in the genre who think that you present it strictly
    >: out-of-camera only. These people don't even accept cropping in post.
    >: They do allow desaturation because digitals capture in color and
    >: purists like b&w.
    >:
    >: I don't worry about the "rules", though. I don't remove or add
    >: anything material, and I declare it if I've asked the subjects to
    >: pose, but if feel that I can do what I want in post-processing.
    >
    >The thing that baffles me in what you said above is how anyone, no matter how
    >much of a purist, could object to cropping. From there, it's only a tiny step
    >to requiring the use of a camera with a specified sensor size and aspect ratio
    >and a lens of a specified focal length.
    >


    That's what makes a purist a purist. The purist, by definition, is
    one who has very strong ideas about what is correct and acceptable and
    opposes any changes or deviation.

    The purist will take the position that all composition has to be done
    in camera and that cropping is a way to re-compose after the fact. In
    the street forums, you'll sometimes see a comment that something in
    the frame is a distraction and cropping would improve the image. The
    purist's reply is "If it's in the frame, it stays in the frame".

    I don't adhere that at all. In fact, I deliberately shoot wide with
    an intent to crop. Since most street shots are quick grabs, I really
    don't have the ability to assess all of the scene and whether or not I
    want it all in the scene. In the shot included in this thread, I took
    the photograph through my car window. I was moving in the car when I
    saw him, but halted briefly (no one was behind me) to take the shot.
    No live view on my camera, so I had to stop to look through the
    viewfinder.

    I usually crop at a 2:3 ratio for the .jpg. (I retain a .dng or .psd
    file uncropped in case I want to print it as a 4x7 or 8x10) In this
    case, I could crop "unconstrained" and chop some off the top of this
    image, but I don't see that as a great improvement.

    I forgot to mention earlier that I did alter the scene in that I did
    some burning to tone down the white on the two street signs reflected
    in the window. The white competed too much with the words "Whiskey
    Dicks" since it's at the same level in the image. Purists don't do
    that, but I do.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #11
  12. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 12:41:14 -0600, philo  <> wrote:

    >On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    >Now that is a great shot!
    >
    >
    >I Googled and figured out it was Orlando
    >
    >then I looked at your sig! LOL
    >
    >
    >Sure looks better than Wisconsin, this time of year.


    Yes, downtown Orlando. I was in shirt-sleeves. All our visitors from
    Wisconsin for the Capital One Bowl that was played here on Wednesday
    appreciated the mild weather for the trip even if they didn't
    appreciate the rain on game day.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 3, 2014
    #12
  13. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    On 2014-01-03 18:41:14 +0000, philo  <> said:

    > On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    > Now that is a great shot!
    >
    >
    > I Googled and figured out it was Orlando
    >
    > then I looked at your sig! LOL
    >
    >
    > Sure looks better than Wisconsin, this time of year.


    Out here at Lake Nacimiento we haven't seen any meaningful rain in over
    a year and here is a glimpse o our winter weather.
    <
    https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Photo Jan 03, 12 12 42.png
    >


    --
    Regards,

    Savageduck
     
    Savageduck, Jan 3, 2014
    #13
  14. Tony Cooper

    philo  Guest

    On 01/03/2014 02:29 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2014-01-03 18:41:14 +0000, philo <> said:
    >
    >> On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>
    >>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Now that is a great shot!
    >>
    >>
    >> I Googled and figured out it was Orlando
    >>
    >> then I looked at your sig! LOL
    >>
    >>
    >> Sure looks better than Wisconsin, this time of year.

    >
    > Out here at Lake Nacimiento we haven't seen any meaningful rain in over
    > a year and here is a glimpse o our winter weather.
    > <
    > https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Photo Jan 03, 12 12 42.png
    >
    >>

    >




    I am glad my wife was not standing behind me. She has been trying to
    initiate a move to Arizona...but the 120F summer temps in the Phoenix
    area are keeping me in Wisconsin.

    She is getting pissed off at my optimistic view of the Wisconsin winters...
    and she does not get mad very easily.
     
    philo , Jan 3, 2014
    #14
  15. Tony Cooper

    philo  Guest

    On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >
    > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >




    I had another look and even showed it to my wife and we were both quite
    impressed. We like everything about it.

    She is the director of a rather elegant gallery in Milwaukee and she
    allows me to curate one photography show every 18 months.


    The next show will be in Sept or Oct of this year.


    If you would like to exhibit the photo please contact me directly.

    My gmail addy is philo565


    Before you make a decision please have a look at the gallery website
    and get the whole picture


    http://gallerygrand.org/


    A look at her history


    http://www.plazaearth.com/philo/




    Please look at these sites only when you have the time and when you are
    relaxed. There is a lot of info there and to get the full story should
    not be quickly skimmed over.
     
    philo , Jan 4, 2014
    #15
  16. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    On 2014-01-03 23:44:39 +0000, philo  <> said:

    > On 01/03/2014 02:29 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >> On 2014-01-03 18:41:14 +0000, philo <> said:
    >>
    >>> On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Now that is a great shot!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I Googled and figured out it was Orlando
    >>>
    >>> then I looked at your sig! LOL
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Sure looks better than Wisconsin, this time of year.

    >>
    >> Out here at Lake Nacimiento we haven't seen any meaningful rain in over
    >> a year and here is a glimpse o our winter weather.
    >> <
    >> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Photo Jan 03, 12 12 42.png
    >>
    >>>

    >>

    >
    >
    >
    > I am glad my wife was not standing behind me. She has been trying to
    > initiate a move to Arizona...but the 120F summer temps in the Phoenix
    > area are keeping me in Wisconsin.
    >
    > She is getting pissed off at my optimistic view of the Wisconsin winters...
    > and she does not get mad very easily.


    Arizona!

    You guys should take a trip out here and survey the California Central
    coast in San Luis Obispo County. There is a reasonable choice of
    micro-climates in the area. Coastal & beach towns such as Morro Bay,
    Avila Beach, Cayucos, Pismo Beach, for starters. Then just a little
    inland is San Luis Obispo (SLO). In the North County where I live
    outside Paso Robles, is our "Wine Country", very much the Napa County
    of the Central Coast.
    From here day trips up Hwy 1 through Big Sur to Carmel & Monterey are
    very convenient. Four hours to the East you have Yosemite &
    Sequoia/Kings Canyon NPs. If you want real heat take a drive over to
    Death Valley.

    If you take a look at the climate data for SLO and Paso Robles you will
    get an idea of the climate differences between North & South SLO County.
    < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Luis_Obispo,_California >
    < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paso_Robles,_California >
    < http://www.visitsanluisobispocounty.com >

    --
    Regards,

    Savageduck
     
    Savageduck, Jan 4, 2014
    #16
  17. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 1/3/2014 1:01 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    >>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>> OK! Here it comes.
    >>>>
    >>>> Great shot! This I like.
    >>>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    >>>
    >>> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    >>> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    >>> too flat.

    >>
    >> I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)

    >
    > The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    > image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    > more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    > masking was done, though.
    >

    Whatever you did, the image works.


    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
    #17
  18. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    On 1/3/2014 9:42 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 22:50:54 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    > wrote:
    > : On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    > : <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    > :
    > : >On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    > : >
    > : >> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    > : >>
    > : >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    > : >
    > : >OK! Here it comes.
    > : >
    > : >Great shot! This I like.
    > : >So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    > :
    > : Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    > : the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    > : too flat.
    >
    > Yeah, a little oversharpening to ring in the new year never hurt anybody. :^)
    >

    OT BTW.
    How did the blizzard treat you.


    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
    #18
  19. Tony Cooper

    Savageduck Guest

    On 2014-01-04 00:44:24 +0000, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:

    > On 2014-01-03 23:44:39 +0000, philo  <> said:
    >
    >> On 01/03/2014 02:29 PM, Savageduck wrote:
    >>> On 2014-01-03 18:41:14 +0000, philo <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> On 01/02/2014 08:27 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >>>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Now that is a great shot!
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I Googled and figured out it was Orlando
    >>>>
    >>>> then I looked at your sig! LOL
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Sure looks better than Wisconsin, this time of year.
    >>>
    >>> Out here at Lake Nacimiento we haven't seen any meaningful rain in over
    >>> a year and here is a glimpse o our winter weather.
    >>> <
    >>> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/Photo Jan 03, 12 12 42.png
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I am glad my wife was not standing behind me. She has been trying to
    >> initiate a move to Arizona...but the 120F summer temps in the Phoenix
    >> area are keeping me in Wisconsin.
    >>
    >> She is getting pissed off at my optimistic view of the Wisconsin winters...
    >> and she does not get mad very easily.

    >
    > Arizona!
    >
    > You guys should take a trip out here and survey the California Central
    > coast in San Luis Obispo County. There is a reasonable choice of
    > micro-climates in the area. Coastal & beach towns such as Morro Bay,
    > Avila Beach, Cayucos, Pismo Beach, for starters. Then just a little
    > inland is San Luis Obispo (SLO). In the North County where I live
    > outside Paso Robles, is our "Wine Country", very much the Napa County
    > of the Central Coast.
    > From here day trips up Hwy 1 through Big Sur to Carmel & Monterey are
    > very convenient. Four hours to the East you have Yosemite &
    > Sequoia/Kings Canyon NPs. If you want real heat take a drive over to
    > Death Valley.
    >
    > If you take a look at the climate data for SLO and Paso Robles you will
    > get an idea of the climate differences between North & South SLO County.
    > < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Luis_Obispo,_California >
    > < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paso_Robles,_California >
    > < http://www.visitsanluisobispocounty.com >


    Oh! To rub it in. Here are the current weather conditions at 4:50 PM.
    < https://db.tt/r2DPoTii >

    --
    Regards,

    Savageduck
     
    Savageduck, Jan 4, 2014
    #19
  20. Tony Cooper

    PeterN Guest

    ge

    On 1/3/2014 1:43 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 12:40:51 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:09:30 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    >> wrote:
    >> : On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:37:23 -0500, Robert Coe <> wrote:
    >> :
    >> : >On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 01:01:00 -0500, Tony Cooper <>
    >> : >wrote:
    >> : >: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 21:34:24 -0800, Savageduck
    >> : >: <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >> : >:
    >> : >: >On 2014-01-03 03:50:54 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >> : >: >
    >> : >: >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:28:06 -0800, Savageduck
    >> : >: >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >> : >: >>
    >> : >: >>> On 2014-01-03 02:27:14 +0000, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >> : >: >>>
    >> : >: >>>> I went out for a couple hours today, but managed only one shot.
    >> : >: >>>>
    >> : >: >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Current-Shots/i-4Rn62f7/0/X2/2014-01-02-03-X2.jpg
    >> : >: >>>
    >> : >: >>> OK! Here it comes.
    >> : >: >>>
    >> : >: >>> Great shot! This I like.
    >> : >: >>> So much so I will restrain myself from further comment.
    >> : >: >>
    >> : >: >> Ah, c'mon...let it out. I deliberately processed to add texture to
    >> : >: >> the stucco and the grain in the window. A straight b&w conversion was
    >> : >: >> too flat.
    >> : >: >
    >> : >: >I was wondering where that noise in the window came from. ;-)
    >> : >:
    >> : >: The whole window area is very dark in the original. It makes the
    >> : >: image top-heavy. That grainy look with the curtains give the image
    >> : >: more balance, in my view, and makes the man more prominent. No
    >> : >: masking was done, though.
    >> : >
    >> : >The manipulation makes the picture look unnatural. And naturalism is sort of
    >> : >the hallmark of street photography, isn't it? But like the Duck, I rather like
    >> : >the way it came out. And the composition is impeccable.
    >> : >
    >> : There we have the essence of the post-processing choices. It's
    >> : unnatural looking, but I like it.
    >> :
    >> : As far as naturalism being required in street photography, there are
    >> : only two rules generally observed in this: never remove or add
    >> : anything material to the scene in post, and never pose the subjects.
    >> :
    >> : Minor cloning-out of distractions is OK. Treatment of the image to
    >> : exaggerate contrast aspects of the scene, as I have done, is OK.
    >> :
    >> : Of course, these "OK"s are not universally accepted as OK. We have
    >> : purists in the genre who think that you present it strictly
    >> : out-of-camera only. These people don't even accept cropping in post.
    >> : They do allow desaturation because digitals capture in color and
    >> : purists like b&w.
    >> :
    >> : I don't worry about the "rules", though. I don't remove or add
    >> : anything material, and I declare it if I've asked the subjects to
    >> : pose, but if feel that I can do what I want in post-processing.
    >>
    >> The thing that baffles me in what you said above is how anyone, no matter how
    >> much of a purist, could object to cropping. From there, it's only a tiny step
    >> to requiring the use of a camera with a specified sensor size and aspect ratio
    >> and a lens of a specified focal length.
    >>

    >
    > That's what makes a purist a purist. The purist, by definition, is
    > one who has very strong ideas about what is correct and acceptable and
    > opposes any changes or deviation.
    >
    > The purist will take the position that all composition has to be done
    > in camera and that cropping is a way to re-compose after the fact. In
    > the street forums, you'll sometimes see a comment that something in
    > the frame is a distraction and cropping would improve the image. The
    > purist's reply is "If it's in the frame, it stays in the frame".
    >
    > I don't adhere that at all. In fact, I deliberately shoot wide with
    > an intent to crop. Since most street shots are quick grabs, I really
    > don't have the ability to assess all of the scene and whether or not I
    > want it all in the scene. In the shot included in this thread, I took
    > the photograph through my car window. I was moving in the car when I
    > saw him, but halted briefly (no one was behind me) to take the shot.
    > No live view on my camera, so I had to stop to look through the
    > viewfinder.
    >
    > I usually crop at a 2:3 ratio for the .jpg. (I retain a .dng or .psd
    > file uncropped in case I want to print it as a 4x7 or 8x10) In this
    > case, I could crop "unconstrained" and chop some off the top of this
    > image, but I don't see that as a great improvement.
    >
    > I forgot to mention earlier that I did alter the scene in that I did
    > some burning to tone down the white on the two street signs reflected
    > in the window. The white competed too much with the words "Whiskey
    > Dicks" since it's at the same level in the image. Purists don't do
    > that, but I do.
    >


    Nothing wrong with any PP, if the object of the image is to make the
    viewer see and feel what the maker saw and felt. Our eyes see
    selectively. The camera takes in everything. alteration of the image is
    necessary to present what the photographer saw. My opinion is far from
    shared with others.

    --
    PeterN
     
    PeterN, Jan 4, 2014
    #20
    1. Advertisements

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.
Similar Threads
  1. f-stop
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    547
    Mark B.
    Jan 7, 2005
  2. Bryan Fenstermacher
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    926
    Ben Rosengart
    Jun 22, 2005
  3. Douglas...

    5D woes starting to surface...

    Douglas..., Oct 23, 2005, in forum: Digital SLR
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    1,273
  4. Chris and Lindsay

    Canon AE1 Photographer starting out

    Chris and Lindsay, Feb 3, 2004, in forum: Canon
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,291
  5. George Christie

    Starting with filters...

    George Christie, Feb 10, 2004, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    472
  6. Just starting

    , Jun 26, 2005, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    930
    ian lincoln
    Jun 30, 2005
  7. MC

    Starting in Photography

    MC, Jul 4, 2004, in forum: Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    433
    starglow
    Jul 11, 2004
  8. Travis

    Looking for a starting point in IR

    Travis, Dec 11, 2004, in forum: Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    462
    Michael
    Dec 19, 2004
Loading...