|
charliebravo77 posted:I think this is getting closer. drat, that's great.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:I think this is getting closer. you can achieve a "dreamlike" look without destroying the data in the shadows as you've done. it doesn't look good. your masking job also needs work - it doesn't blend in and is very visible  the second version you posted is the better one still - in terms of how heavy handed the processing is, which it's not, so it looks natural and unforced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2021 20:41
|
|
|
Nup, bad again. If you want something that looks more of the era then look into pro mist filters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
do not, my friends, become addicted to lifting the blacks into grays, it will take hold of you and you will resent its absence
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2021 21:09
|
|
|
Here's a quick and dirty edit - please don't take offense, it's your image after all, so this might not be what you were looking to accomplish. I knocked the contrast and a bit of the brightness down in GIMP, then applied a q+d high pass filter just on the neon bail bonds sign to bring it back into poppiness. This is my version of what I saw in the original vlog-like grey washed photo, without the grey wash. I did it because it's a gorgeous photo and it just needs a tiny bit of tweaking to get to the next . My tweaks might not be the best but hopefully they help explain what I was thinking, seeing the original.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
Black Levels Matter! The picture reminded me to look up the release date for the next season of Better Call Saul.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Here's a quick and dirty edit - please don't take offense, it's your image after all, so this might not be what you were looking to accomplish. I knocked the contrast and a bit of the brightness down in GIMP, then applied a q+d high pass filter just on the neon bail bonds sign to bring it back into poppiness. This is my version of what I saw in the original vlog-like grey washed photo, without the grey wash. Erhh, that really didn't help at all!. The wonderful neon blue in the window is gone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 00:27
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Erhh, that really didn't help at all!. The wonderful neon blue in the window is gone. Yeah I see what you mean. I did say it was quick and dirty! Thankfully that's an easy fix.  High pass filter maybe wasn't the best choice of thing to use, but however you get there I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:it's cinematic bro u wouldn't understand op is taking the feedback on board and modifying the image, why be a dick? you're not offering contructive criticism, just pointless snark Wafflecopper fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Jul 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 01:19
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:op is taking the feedback on board and modifying the image, why be a dick? you're not offering contructive criticism, just pointless snark It could be he was being sarcastic? Anyway, for what it's worth, I'd usually be on board with changing the grade – Crush the blacks! Peak the whites! – but in this case, I think I still really like the original, in that it seems a bit more 'elusively vintage' with the raised black levels.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 01:47
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:op is taking the feedback on board and modifying the image, why be a dick? you're not offering contructive criticism, just pointless snark would you like me to post my constructive criticism of the image?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:would you like me to post my constructive criticism of the image? if you want. it's not my image
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:23
|
|
|
care to elaborate?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:27
|
|
|
you've been posting here long enough to know better than to tut-tut snarky feedback to photographs, or even disagreeing with fleeting praise for something. i think it's a pretty boring image, compositionally. it's got 2 subjects, but neither are being taken together, it's "neon at night" and "old car", two easy tropes smashed together into one, without much direction. what's the image about? the sign, or the car? i can't tell, but it's definitely not about them together, because they feel like two entirely disparate elements crammed into one frame. the editing, especially with the lifted blacks, feels like this sort of manufactured "nostalgia" that i really cannot vibe with. there's a weird assumption that old things are faded, or were faded in the past, but how much of that is an incorrect assumption from how we digitize old materials? how much is it from modern color grading in films? it feels flippant, like you click a button and everything becomes "vintage". as a viewer, i find myself thinking more about the processing and why anyone would choose to do that than the image itself, which, imo, is not really a good thing to find in a photograph. these things together just make me feel bored, it's like seeing a bad screenshot of a movie that never existed. movies exist as a whole, with motion, time, sound, visuals, but just having a single frame removed from the rest doesn't feel like good photography, it feels like pastiche. i could understand it in a series, maybe, with some sort of broader message being communicated, but as-is, it's just artistically reactionary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:38
|
|
|
but anyways didn't mean to detract from the hollow praise in here, as i should know the only feedback relevant is about your histogram
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:39
|
|
|
p0stal b0b posted:It could be he was being sarcastic? My main problem with this is that what it's replicating is bad form. This lifted blacks look to emulate vintage is just emulating poor scanning and poor printing control. When I gently caress up a print, that's what it looks like. It means my exposure wasn't long enough, or my development time wasn't long enough and I need to start again. It's leaning on a modern idea of what printing looked like in the past that is incorrect. People who do colorization of old photographs also fall into this making the past far more drab than it ever was and putting smiles on the faces of victims of the Khmer Rouge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:44
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:you've been posting here long enough to know better than to tut-tut snarky feedback to photographs, or even disagreeing with fleeting praise for something. It could work more as a car photo than a "landscape photo", especially the dark edit, which may be a genre you don't have any interest in, which is fine. This might address the stylistic points you raise, which you are free to dismiss as utter twaddle of course. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcCTnCP91bo I enjoy images like the OP's, because I like tableau as an artistic style, and a still from a movie that doesn't exist I think absolutely fits in that genre.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:52
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:It could work more as a car photo than a "landscape photo", especially the dark edit, which may be a genre you don't have any interest in, which is fine. "car photography" is fine as a genre but it doesn't even work in that genre, it's still a secondary subject to a primary subject that doesn't seem clear
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 02:54
|
|
|
okay. this to me is good feedback. i still disagree over snark. bluntly honest is fine, but random snark is gonna discourage a lot of people from posting in the first place and tbh i think this thread could use some more new blood, it moves pretty slowly these days. even if that means more bad photos get posted that's okay imo if they can take critique on board and get better
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:01
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:... it's got 2 subjects, but neither are being taken together, it's "neon at night" and "old car", two easy tropes smashed together into one, without much direction. what's the image about? the sign, or the car? i can't tell, but it's definitely not about them together, because they feel like two entirely disparate elements crammed into one frame. I disagree as I get a "Breaking Bad" or "Better Call Saul" vibe from it. Assuming OP is a hobbyist, I will say mission accomplished, as it is a pleasant image.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:08
|
|
|
why should criticism be held to a different standard than praise?theHUNGERian posted:I disagree as I get a "Breaking Bad" or "Better Call Saul" vibe from it. this doesn't disagree with what i'm saying - i don't think that mimicry is interesting. why is there a line for hobbyist vs. something-else? i'm just a hobbyist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:09
|
|
|
Here are my blunt thoughts on this photo and every other "vintage aesthetic" you see these days: The photo is a lazy heavy handed approach to produce an aesthetic that only every existed in the minds eye of people who never lived through that period of time it's a fantasy, and a boring one at that
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:you've been posting here long enough to know better than to tut-tut snarky feedback “feedback”. Come on. You’ve been posting here long enough to know that all you were doing was mocking somebody.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
tk posted:“feedback”. Come on. You’ve been posting here long enough to know that all you were doing was mocking somebody. maybe it's mocking, but that's mostly because the OP has continuously posted photos with lifted blacks and has been told many times that it's not a good aesthetic, it's tired and uninspired. they cling to that being their style, when it's not a style but a borrowed aesthetic. style is something more personal than that. i can't be 100%, but i think i remember op saying they're not interested in improving or evolving, which is fine as a personal choice. but it doesn't make their photos any better when they keep posting the same thing. theHUNGERian posted:I disagree as I get a "Breaking Bad" or "Better Call Saul" vibe from it. i've seen both and absolutely disagree with this. which parts remind you of those serials? if i were to guess, it would be the old car, a la new mexico cartel, some sort of bounty hunter thing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:23
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:why should criticism be held to a different standard than praise? I think the two subjects can be taken together, which is the opposite of what you said. There is a story here, though I admit it's only two elements, but my brain is happily filling in the rest. bellows lugosi posted:why is there a line for hobbyist vs. something-else? i'm just a hobbyist. A toddler learning how to walk should be held to a different standard than an Olympic athlete. Going back 10 pages in this thread, I have seen less interesting pictures (including all of mine), so I am surprised by the heavy critique, especially since the thread title literally contains "parking lots".
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:24
|
|
|
bellows lugosi posted:why should criticism be held to a different standard than praise? fair question. personally i find it a lot harder to articulate what i like about an image than what i don't, so when i praise an image it's generally a very short post. i still think low-content praise has more value than low-content snark/mockery (especially when it comes after the OP has without defensiveness already taken negative feedback on board) because it's encouraging to know that somebody enjoyed your work. if you go from nobody commenting on your posts to a trickle of people quoting you and saying "nice" then you know you're getting better even if it's not as useful as real critique (whether it's positive or negative)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:26
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:i've seen both and absolutely disagree with this. which parts remind you of those serials? if i were to guess, it would be the old car, a la new mexico cartel, some sort of bounty hunter thing? It's like a Rorschach test: "old car" + "bail bonds" = "Better Call Saul" is the first thing that came to my mind. 
theHUNGERian fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Jul 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
Frank discussion, mockery and feedback without pulling punches is what makes the Dorkroom better than all other places to discuss photography online. A "snarky" post is more interesting than "I agree". Charlie is not a new poster and this is not his first rodeo to the lifted blacks discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:31
|
|
|
Spedman posted:Here are my blunt thoughts on this photo and every other "vintage aesthetic" you see these days: anemoia
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:39
|
|
|
theHUNGERian posted:It's like a Rorschach test: "old car" + "bail bonds" = "Better Call Saul" is the first thing that came to my mind. i can see why you'd say that, but for me it's only the tiniest hint and i wouldn't have made that connection unless you said it. the thing about the photo though is that this connection wasn't intentional
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
"the dorkroom is dead because of your snark" they say as the thread lights up again after i post
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:02
|
|
|
i'm just going to siskel and ebert your photographs but siskel's already dead and i only give thumbs down
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:03
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:14
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:i still think low-content praise has more value than low-content snark/mockery (especially when it comes after the OP has without defensiveness already taken negative feedback on board) because it's encouraging to know that somebody enjoyed your work. This is wrong af. Low content "praising" comments are fine in smaller peer groups but in a vacuum they stunt your artistic growth by teaching you to seek praise. 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Jul 27, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:you can achieve a "dreamlike" look without destroying the data in the shadows as you've done. Huh, yeah, for some reason I didn't see that terrible line earlier - maybe it was too bright in this room because I can clearly see it now. I actually really dislike the most recent version now that I am seeing it more clearly. As for the other uhh 28? previous posts, I fully understand the lifted blacks thing is pretty divisive and "bad" in a lot of peoples' opinions. I don't always use it, I'm not opposed to not doing it (see subsequent edits since posting it) and do actually value the criticism. Art is subjective, discourse is good, learning is valuable, photography is fun.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:30
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:i can see why you'd say that, but for me it's only the tiniest hint and i wouldn't have made that connection unless you said it. Well I've watched Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul and work in a bail bond/bounty hunter adjacent career so it definitely wasn't not intentional. Another go. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 04:48
|
|
|
right, okay, that's a better edit of it. now that you've got the blacks under control there are other issues to address with the photo - like bellows mentioned there is no clear subject, it's two tropes mashed into one. go back to the spot and take another photo, but this time stand further back, give the elements in the photo breathing room to coalesce, to gain context, so we can see where the owner of that business lives, in what sort of environment. it will breathe life into it. another issue i notice is that you went too far with the removal of noise in the photo so it seen at full res looks like it's lost a lot of detail and looks soft and splotchy. just bring a tripod next time and close down the aperture. or shoot at higher iso and don't worry about the noise. i'd also suggest getting a good calibrated ips monitor and also to never edit photos in daylight since you miss details in your processing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 05:01
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 05:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:As for the other uhh 28? previous posts, I fully understand the lifted blacks thing is pretty divisive and "bad" in a lot of peoples' opinions. I don't always use it, I'm not opposed to not doing it (see subsequent edits since posting it) and do actually value the criticism. Art is subjective, discourse is good, learning is valuable, photography is fun. I disagree with the concept of art being subjective, and I think it's a copout shorthand for "there's no accounting for taste". Saying that art is subjective presumes that all art is of equal worth. It puts the critical evaluation on the viewer, presumes them correct if they say "This is art" and labels them incorrect if they disagree. There's no accounting for taste defines art as qualitative. It can be good or bad, likewise your viewer can also be good or bad. Bad taste exists as much as bad art does. To say that art isn't qualitative is dismissive of the entire concept and school of art. What is the purpose of a curator? In the same vain I often find myself holding 2 contradictory beliefs. A: The art I make is for myself, and I don't care what people think of it, it's my catharsis B: I want my art to be appreciated and thought of as good I view my catharsis separate from outside approval. Is my personal relationship to my art and its meaning any more or less valid than your relationship to my art and its meaning to you? Is it a failure if you don't derive my meaning, or do I not own your reaction to my art, are both valid? I end up thus. As soon as my art is released it is no longer mine to hang meaning and substance on, that is the purview of the viewer. I do not create within your lived experience so I do not get to guide you through my meaning, it is enough to touch someone, even if it is not as intended.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 05:20
|
|