|
|
Maurizio Spadaccino
{K:5132} 10/11/2005
|
very nice picture of the Gate, Lily...
We got some pics in common now! ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
deniz cesmeci
{K:5726} 6/16/2005
|
well done
|
|
|
|
Dr. Rafael Springmann
{K:89517} 6/16/2005
|
This is our first, but hopefully not last meeting on the pages of "Usefilm", Ms. Lili. As you give me no choice but to call you by your first name, I would prefer that you do that with me. Most people, including the few patients I still have, call me Rafi and unless you object, that is what I would prefer you to call me.
You photos show me that you live in the US, a country I drove through twice and learned to like very much.
Your photos show a great dexterity in the use of P.S., much greater than mine and at the same time a great variability of subjects and the use of imagination. That they are excellent photo goes without saying.
Of all of them I opted to comment on this one because the Golden Gate Bridge is strong in my memory and even more so because of the unique caption you gave it.
You are, of course, invited to read my bio, that will show you, among other things, that I am a psychoanalyst and pay further visits to my portfolio.
In the meantime I thank you for your very generous comment on my "Triple celebration 3." You guessed right. We had, among other things, apple cake that night. Another specialty we had, which the children demand on every occasion, was hard boiled eggs, halved, with aspargus in a mixture of yogurt and mayonnaise (I hope my spelling is right.) I'll attchach a photo of this delicatess.
Best regards,
Rafi
|
Eggs and aspargus |
|
|
|
Jose Ignacio (Nacho) Garcia Barcia
{K:96391} 6/13/2005
|
magnificent. stunning . 7
|
|
|
|
ISMAEL MARCOS
{K:10535} 5/31/2005
|
we have seen golden gate a lot of times: in all positions, in all features...hoewer i like this one, lily. and thanks to ...you
you've done a great transformation
ismael.
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret Sturgess
{K:49403} 5/13/2005
|
WOnderful work you did on this, the colours and tones, give it a lovely soft and a painting quality. To be able to see the potential of turning a perfectly okay but fairly ordinary scene into something of such beauty is very creative, I really like it
Margaret
|
|
|
|
Markus Scholz
{K:23722} 5/7/2005
|
Thanks, Lily. I've answered Steve (much shorter as his elaboration;)).
Cheers, Markus
|
|
|
|
|
Markus Scholz
{K:23722} 5/7/2005
|
Hi Steve, I underline your comment 100%. What I was aiming for with my thoughts was, that in the times before digital imaging, a photograph was a kind of proof of evidence. Not longer now, but there are already tools developed (or under development) which allow the proof, a photograph is not manipulated. The pendulum is striking back again.
Regards, Markus
|
|
|
|
Petal Wijnen
{K:50989} 5/7/2005
|
Missed this one as I was away for a couple of days and a pitty I did, but luckily I caught your comment on a comment, so now I can tell you: Great shot!!! Super tones, view/angle and composition... well done!!! And to put my 5 cents in: If the photograph you're starting out with is cra... then whatever amount of PS you throw at it, won't make it a better shot...
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Lily
{K:10966} 5/7/2005
|
Hi Markus and Steve - Excuse my tardiness. This is a controversial subject it seems, I see references to it every day, even in one of the UF project descriptions. I myself used to think increasing saturation via PS was cheating until I realized Velvia film produces colors that are not necessarily representative of the scene. So in some cases the bias we hold against digital is unfair as Steve's nd grad filter example illustrates (I haven't tried it but it sounds like you have to do complicated work to achieve the same results using software), in other cases, a photoart classification may be justified as Markus suggests. I thank you both for leaving thoughtful comments on my picture. Best wishes my friends.
|
|
|
|
|
Jose Ignacio (Nacho) Garcia Barcia
{K:96391} 5/7/2005
|
great composition.
|
|
|
|
|
.. ..
{K:302} 5/5/2005
|
Hi Lily, its always nice to see the Golden Gate, you did a good job with PS, BRAVO! I like the atmosphere now. Cheers
thanks for your comment:-)
|
|
|
|
|
Hayri CALISKAN
{K:16195} 4/30/2005
|
Absolutely fantastic composition with great perspective.
Regards, Hayri.
|
|
|
|
|
Hayri CALISKAN
{K:16195} 4/30/2005
|
Absolutely fantastic composition with great perspective.
Regards, Hayri.
|
|
|
|
|
Domenico Pescosolido
{K:10022} 4/24/2005
|
Artistic vision of an excellent shot!
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Hennerley
{K:5776} 4/24/2005
|
Hi Lily -
Very nice shot - with excellent - and very subtle PS work. With regards Markus's comment about image editing.... despite the fact that volumes have been written on this subject - my personal view is that - in the vast majority of cases - there is no difference in using digital imaging techniques to anything else the photographer has in his or her bag of tricks.
In this case, the "digital designer" IS the photographer. Why is it any different for the photogrpher to tone the image in PS or use a coloured filter, or toning solutions,to increase saturation in PS - or use Velvia film, or to use Dodge and Burn tools in PS or old bits of paper under the enlarger to do this photographically. Sure the skills needed are different - but they are - in my firm opinion - as valid as photographic skills as anything else.
Whether we use chemicals or pixels in a digital or film camera - the end result is a photographic image. Why then is the manipulation of these considered different? Why should we regard a "digital designer" as anything else but a photographer using "digital darkroom" techniques.
I very much doubt that ANYONE would have made any comment about the image being less than natural if Lily had used a sunset filter, or maybe a graduated nd filter and some toning soltion in the darkroom - with a bit of dodge/burn in the enlargemeny process - together with careful selection of film and development chemicals to bring this image into being exactly as we see it here.
We are all members of ths site because we regard photography as an art. Without an artistic application of composition, framing, exposure, tone and post shot processing (chemical or digital) - then all photographs would be merely snapshots.
A photograph is much much more than just a visual representation of the light from obejects at the time of the shot. Aside from forensic, or scientific, or evidential photography - where aesthetics do not neccesaril apply - I believe the photograph is there as a representation of the photographer's - the ARTISTS - view of the scene.
Manipulation by any form will always be a part of an artistic representation. Do you really think that the models painted by great artiss really had the flawless skin etc they were pained with? On a more basic level - with any form of photography - he image has already been manipulated by hands unknown before you can get anywhere near it - be that by the chemist who formulated the silver oxides in your film - or by the programmer or electronic engineer who worked out what visual representation of colour a particular voltage pattern from CCD pixels should form.
The oly other view I would raise is that - and though it may sound it - i do not believe this view is hypocritical - I believe there are cases where a well exposed, completely unmanipulated image - shows off a photographers skill with their camera and their environment - and should maybe be credited. If an image is altered however - I do not feel there is any difference whether this is done in the darkroom or in the computer - credit is still due to the photographer and the image they wished us to see.
This is is no way at all against Markus - but his comment inspired my own view of this subject. Apologies for such a long comment :)
...in case you have forgotten - A great sot Lily - well done :)
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Roberto Okamura
{K:22851} 4/23/2005
|
Excellent composition Lily!
Thank you for commment in my "Grilo"!
Roberto.
|
|
|
|
|
Antonia BauerleinSehnert
{K:30599} 4/20/2005
|
Fantastic editing!! Great shot of the bridge. Antonia
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Spracklen
{K:32552} 4/19/2005
|
One of the better shots I've seen of this bridge, Lily, and I've seen quite a few!
Nice work!
Kind regards, Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Markus Scholz
{K:23722} 4/19/2005
|
Excellent work you performed on the original shot, Lily. The effect is so much better. The only thing I have to think about is, how far manipulation can go and is it still the photographer or more the digital designer who makes the picture (nothing against your work though, I also like to play with PS, just thinking).
Best regards, Markus
|
|
|
|
Gerry Pacher
{K:7303} 4/19/2005
|
Dear Lily,
it's a classic but beautiful shot and I love the tone.
Regards, Gerry
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Lily
{K:10966} 4/19/2005
|
Girish, This was a very fast PS try to see what it would look like with slightly different colors. First, I adjusted contrast, and levels. Part of the sky looked blown out so in order to cover that up I pulled a linear gradient from the top of image down to bridge to create a foggy looking layer. To change the colors I used channel mixer. I would give you the exact numbers for the channels but I wrote over my psd file, only have the jpg. I cropped, rotated a little and dodged some of the waves lightly (40%). I could have also brightened up the hills and the bridge but I didn't so it's incomplete. Thanks for your comment.
|
|
|
|
|
Girish Chonkar
{K:6903} 4/19/2005
|
What a lovely colors, title is creative representation of golden bridge. Amazing work on original picture, I would like to know some details about this enhancements done to original.
girishanagha@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
Debby Biri
{K:4775} 4/19/2005
|
Lily - This is a very nice shot of the bridge. The tones are very nice and the grey day made the sky soft. I really like the title - very cute. -- Debby
|
|
|
|
|
Alastair Bell
{K:29571} 4/19/2005
|
Great job of enhancement Lily! It looks really good and still quite natural. I like the angle on this too... not a normal 'cliche' angle at all....
Excellent resolution for a 2.1MP camera too! Excellent work!
Alastair
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Lily
{K:10966} 4/19/2005
|
This is original.
|
|
|
0 
