[Little_PB_Newb]

I'm still seeing artifacts in the hair, might just be because it's a fairly small image..can you try saving it at around 800-1000px wide?

[Bluewolf]

1600x957: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fpmurph...n/photostream/

[Little_PB_Newb]

Yeah something's really off in the hair, did you sharpen it?

[Hammi]

I like the original shot way better than the edited one.

[Bluewolf]

Originally Posted by Little_PB_Newb

Yeah something's really off in the hair, did you sharpen it?

Nope. I actually didn't sharpen anything. After the first one became over sharpened, I just turned off my sharpening layers and uploaded it again. I do see a couple spots I missed with the cloning tool though.

Originally Posted by Hammi

I like the original shot way better than the edited one.

Is this directed at me? I'm assuming you're talking about the first photo I uploaded. I didn't upload the original of this one. What about the edited one makes you like it less? Too processed?

[outkast kid]

Drexel's 2012 Digital Media Senior Show, my senior show.


practicing to present in front of 300+ people




demonstrating our iPad game to the masses


19 out of the 22 seniors in my major, right before we presented the last 9 months of our lives to the public

full size

[PaintedSaint]

Originally Posted by Bluewolf

Here is a photo where I used frequency separation. Also, the eyes/hair aren't as extreme this time.

upper and bottom extremes of the lips dont look right and the rightside dimple isnt defined enough for her expression imo

[steggun]

Originally Posted by Cmizzle

Idk why I am getting banding

when shooting skating you wanna get the whole process of the trick. you gotta get the runup/poping point and the landing as well. gotta show the whole story for the trick. next time be sure to get more of the landing in frame. you dont always need a lot of it, but at least a little. here's a basic example





this might help you for shooting skating in the future

[Striker9]

[fainerbainer]

sweet image...it's tempting to figure out how to finagle a high res out of you and then start making large prints of it and sell it under my name lol. Makes me want to go out right now and take some shots.

[Striker9]

Just kidding. I don't mind giving people high res as long as they don't try to sell them. The photos I post are for personal entertainment, not related to my work, so I'm not really looking to make money off them. Plus, I have yet to find the right people who will want to buy them (that could be because I haven't set up a store for people to easily purchase them)

[fainerbainer]

hmm, gives me an idea for a write up.

"People who should be paid for their images but they aren't"

[.Outlaw.]

Originally Posted by Striker9

The reflection of the sky in the water is what makes this IMO. Wonderful colors too.

[steggun]

Originally Posted by Striker9

what were your settings roughly for this picture? ive been trying to do some night shooting. i usually just sit there and mess around with everything till i find something i like. was just curious bout wat you used

[reddogphoto]

Originally Posted by steggun

what were your settings roughly for this picture? ive been trying to do some night shooting. i usually just sit there and mess around with everything till i find something i like. was just curious bout wat you used

FYI: http://regex.info/exif.cgi?imgurl=ht...2F63419870.jpg

[pbjunkiee]

90% Photoshop

[Little_PB_Newb]

noticed adobe98, it's a really good idea to get in the habbit of saving web copies in sRGB, they'll appear normal in Firefox since it bases it's display on the embedded profile, but browsers like chrome, I believe IE, and Opera force their own conversion and it will appear improperly to people viewing it.

[Striker9]

Let me explain my process since the EXIF data won't make any sense.

This shot was from a road overpass. I originally shot with my Tokina 11-16 2.8. However, I didn't like the distortion that the lens gave me as seen below:



Obviously this photo had to be an HDR in order to get the complete tonal range of the sky and the ground into 1 shot.

I decided to use my 85mm 1.8 instead which greatly decreased distortion. I then shot at my base exposure for the ground/river, and shot around 20 exposures which would allow me to stitch together a panoramic.

I then changed my shutter speed to expose properly for the sky, and shot another series to be stitched into a panorama. Then I combined both sky and ground exposures to come up with an image that could represent both the ground and the sky the way my eyes did.

After that, it was just a matter of color correction and dodging and burning to create focus on different parts of the image. I hope that helps.

Originally Posted by pbjunkiee

90% Photoshop

.

[Cmizzle]

dayum

[pbjunkiee]

Toldya

[chris_arnet]

Please C&C, thank you!!!
#1

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#2

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#3

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#4

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#5

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#6

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#7

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#8

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr

#9

Julia by Orange Imaging, on Flickr