|
RangerScum posted:To be fair, not all gay men perform oral sex on other men. You are potentially offending gay men who do not prefer to perform oral sex by unfairly stereotyping them. "I'm sorry you are offended" nice. You (and Aeka 2.0) could just stop using cocksucker as a pejorative, but I'm sure the inconvenience that would put you under is directly comparable to the misogyny and homophobia of today's culture.
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2011 14:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
RangerScum posted:I am always interested in knowing things that could potentially upset people. If that is the case, then try not to use cocksucker as a pejorative. Your semantic quibble aside, we all know that cocksucker implies "other than straight male", so using it as a pejorative is easily taken as homophobic and/or misogynistic. taqueso posted:When did goons become so PC? Since this is a specialized sub-forum that is trying to have a well rounded audience to enjoy and discuss photography inside of; and a homophobic, racist, or misogynistic circle jerk of straight white males will ensure a continuation of the lack of input from other viewpoints that many forums suffer from? poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Jun 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2011 14:43
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:I'm so offended by your username, man. My dad died in a human centipede. Try not to backseat so much, gently caress. I'd report you if I had plat, but I'll bring it up every single time someone does it, so if you don't like it, stop. Your idiotic hyperbole has no basis in reality, human centipedes aren't a real group of people, however women and gay men are. And I know why you use it, you're a privileged baby that doesn't have any words that exist that can hurt you, but at the same time get offended when someone asks you not to use slurs. If you truly "love your gay relatives" then maybe you should think a bit harder on if some of your words can remind them of actual homophobic interactions they've had in their past, regardless of your political intentions at the ballot box. Your argument is the same one that 14 year olds use when they say human being, that it's just a word that means bad things, they don't hate gay people! (repeat with retard, oval office, friend of the family, etc) l33tc4k30fd00m posted:Should we stop saying things like "fucker" next because it's offensive to sexhavers? Or is it okay because straight males can be fuckers? The best part of when I mention "straight white males" is that people get their panties in a bunch, while at the same time trying to say that gay men (who actually face real discrimination) are too sensitive about gay slurs. The irony is truly delicious. poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Jun 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 11:45
|
|
|
EvoDevo posted:Can we please get off this drat derail about being politically correct? I like reading this thread to learn about Post Processing, not to hear a bunch of overly emotional goons complain because someone said "cocksucker". How about this? If you want to have a discussion about the proper use of profanity/slurs make a GBS thread. How about both of you fuckers do this, click the little ? mark next to my name, then yours, you'll see who's posted actual post processing content and who is 'making GBS threads up the thread". I know which person the thread would be poorer without! and it's going to be me if gay slurs are not only allowed, but straight dudes pour in to defend. gently caress you both.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 15:30
|
|
|
scottch posted:The one I linked has quite a lot of info on film, but it has plenty of info for digital as well. And many of the chapters apply to both, of course. The Negative is all film, and is still relevant to that, but digital requires a slight tweak of the zone system, from what I understand. Even different cameras can require a different use of the zone system. This is why I like to use one body for so long without upgrading. I used my 5D so much and for so long that I know where to place data on the histogram in order to keep lots of contrast and detail without it clipping into black or white, and where I have wiggle room. I've been shooting a lot with my X100, but I still don't have quite as good a handle on it. It seems it handles extreme highlights just a tiny bit less good than the 5D, but I like how it handles shadows, and reds, much better. Knowing your gear is really important, especially when trying to fit a lot of info into a single exposure, or to prioritize what you want. As an example:  DSCF2090.jpg by mr-chompers, on Flickr The first shot showed me that the camera had metered in such a way that the shadows were a bit too open, and his face got really clipped. I wanted it bright and sunny, but I didn't want to lose his cheekbones. I dialed in -1 exposure compensation so it would send the darks down, I knew I could recover them, the X100 has tons of shadow detail, but the highlights would be harder. Worked just like I was thinking in the field once I loaded it into lightroom, but it took knowing my recording medium's characteristics, which is a core tenet of the Zone system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 17:11
|
|
|
I feel like a total dumbass for not knowing about this before. Behold, the clone source panel: http://www.petapixel.com/2011/06/21/using-the-photoshop-clone-source-panel/
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2011 15:56
|
|
|
Please, someone else who is a photoshop expert tell me they also were unaware of this panel? I feel like I need to turn in my card or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2011 11:41
|
|
|
teamgod posted:Which sliders, exactly? Fill light. Though I prefer using the curves, darks up, shadows down a bit, to maintain contrast, but you can use curves and fill light in conjunction.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
XTimmy posted:I'm trying to blend this Try putting the sky image on the bottom, and the woman on the top, in a multiply layer. Works well. Then you just need to do some quick masking of the horizon, and her.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2011 12:17
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I don't use Lightroom so i don't have a Clarity slider, Grad ND filters, or film grain built in. I tried both colorfine and silverfx with lightroom open, trying to do similar effects in both. The Nik software allowed me to take certain effects further than in lightroom, but it was past the point I thought was visually appealing. My conclusion was that lightroom gives me all the control I needed, and I uninstalled the Nik software. Not saying it isn't useful, those without strong post ideas probably gain a lot from the presets giving you starting points, but for someone already happy with lightroom, hopefully my viewpoint is helpful in figuring out that it's not really adding anything you're missing currently.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2011 11:14
|
|
|
Haggins posted:
lol A tablet is insanely powerful for subtle stuff. Dodging and burning slightly can be done with the mouse, but if you want fine control quickly, or to paint in details that don't exist or can't be cloned from, a tablet is indispensable. When a bamboo can be had for 40 bux in a hobby where you can't even enter for much less than 600-1000 bux, there isn't much excuse for not having one. I don't use my wacom on every photo, but I did on every portfolio image of mine. Plus you can do stuff like this with a tablet (mine): https://vimeo.com/27213367
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 11:32
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I've tried it but I still feel like I get more control with Viveza. Not to mention, it's a whole helluva lot quicker. As for cloning, I don't do it often and when I do, it's usually so small it doesn't matter what I use. No one is going to tell you your personal workflow is wrong. If you like viveza more and don't think a tablet would help, that's your prerogative. But as this is the post processing "how to" advice thread, the objectively good advice for someone wanting to get better at post is "buy a tablet".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 11:37
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:I'm really terrible at photoshop. I figured with practice I'd get better, but I'm still awful at cloning/healing, and I'd really like to get better at it. Just from searching for tutorials, all I can find are really basic ones that show you how to use it in really generic situations. Anyone know of more detailed ones that have some tips/tricks and are more advanced for cloning out a major object with a busy background? I feel like there is a whole world of awesome available to me that I can't quite get at. This gives me an idea for a video tutorial.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 11:40
|
|
|
I've used a tablet PC with only 256 levels and didn't notice the difference. Physical size and ensuring it's Wacom brand is the important part.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 23:02
|
|
|
I'm still using an Intuos 2 6x8 that I bought in university, 10 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 23:29
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Okay magic ps experts. I need to get rid of the dog stuff in the picture below. Hindsight...should have taken them out when I took the picture. I figure this is good practice for me too, but everytime I try, I make a sloppy, really obvious mess. I am using content aware fill, patch, clone stamp and the healing brush, and I am just making a godawful mess. Is there something else I should be using? You are going to need some painting skills for this. If it were mine, I'd make a new layer, then using the standard paint brush, and color picking from within the image, I'd "paint out" the stuff, the bowls first, then on another layer the mattress. At this point I would have an image that passes the thumbnail viewing size, but is too painterly, so I'd steal surface texture using clone/heal to make it more realistic. You have too little smooth surfaces, and too much missing objects (the bottom of the table legs) and then perspective and mixed lighting making the tiles almost useless. Like I'd start with "dark tile" color and paint over the mattress, ignoring the grout, just getting the general tone of the floor right. Then I'd paint with browns picked from the table legs for the table legs. If you've never painted anything... good luck! *edit* what the hell, i had a moment. This is with a mouse so it's not that smooth, but this shows how I'd paint it out, this is just a 100% opaque brush with 50% blurry edge to lay down color, then backed off to 40% to smooth the tones on the floor. I have another layer for the table wood, and a third for the tile grout. I could easily go over this now with the heal or clone slowly to bring back in the proper texture. 
poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 10:31 on Sep 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 11:30
|
|
|
Suicide Watch posted:
Is it still multiple layers? or is it a flat jpeg? you need each image it's own layer, select all, edit > austo blend layers
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2011 11:07
|
|
|
Pagan posted:Would anyone mind posting their favorite method of B&W conversion? I've always been really fond of portraits that capture a lot of texture and detail, but I can't get mine to look like this. Even without the wrinkled skin, the tones in these just look great. Are the portraits you are working on of white people? Because if yes, that's your problem. You know how at body builder competitions, the white guys slather on brown skin toner? That's because it allows for more value ranges. With a black or brown person "middle" tone is actually in the middle, shadows can go to almost pure black AND specular highlights are a large distance in brightness above that middle brown. With a white person, "middle" tone is already kind of bright, so shadows normally don't go past middle grey, and specular highlights are only a little bit brighter than their skin tone. You're never going to get the exact look of those portraits you posted without bronzing their skin or shooting non-pale people.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 12:32
|
|
|
brad industry posted:
From when I worked a studio with a dedicated tech artist, this is what he did, so I'm assuming it's the workaround.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2011 13:39
|
|
|
Gonktastic posted:
You could do it if you were wanting to put that fabric pattern on a solid, but trying to put it on another pattern is going to be insanely difficult. If you had to do it, I'd make a new layer over the existing shirt, and with white and black brushes I'd try to replicate the shading of the dress wrinkles. Then I'd lay the new pattern over top, use liquify to distort it around the volume of her torso, use the magic lasso and masking (or the pen tool) to mask the new pattern to the right shape, then use that black and white wrinkle layer overlayed on soft light or overlay to get it to look like fabric. I'd follow with some dodge and burning to further get it to look like it's draped on her figure. And finally a split tone layer to try to match the lighting color. So yeah, a lot of work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
I had a moment so I figured I'd show you what I meant. Obviously if this was commercial I'd have been tighter with details on the shading, but this gives you the general workflow idea.  
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2012 13:43
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:
With lightroom or photoshop, you just want to use the lens correction tool. I always try to rotate first to get a center line straight up and down, cause that will make the correction easier, then play with the vertical correction, and then horizontal if it needs it (not so often). Here you can see the settings I used. *edit* if inserted file does not work* http://www.poopinmymouth.com/net/sa/persp.gif poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Nov 13, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:The VSCO 04 slide film pack is decently close to real slide film but still the difference is obvious. I'd say the colours are fairly accurate but the luminosity is not the same, probably for the reasons given about the response curve. I actually shot the same scenes on digital and slide film to compare for myself. Show us please? Would love to see that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 11:09
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I don't get the point of worrying about getting exact replicas of film. No one is ever going to notice. I mean maybe you'd get an older photographer who would notice the differences, but that's not your audience. Yeah I have two VSCO presets I really love for just how the photos feel afterward. It might not be 100% accurate to whatever film it's emulating, but I like how it looks and that's the point.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
northward posted:Tommy Ga Ken Wan does this in his photos a lot by pushing the blues in the shadows whoah, love his stream
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2014 15:51
|
|