HOME | DD

MarcWeiz In reply to yellowgirl83 [2011-09-15 12:05:02 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MarcWeiz In reply to lozers [2011-09-15 12:04:23 +0000 UTC]

It's basic levels + curves for contrast + lots of 'dodge' on the man (as I couldn't capture the whole range, I opted to capture the the background as it was and post-process the mans light to a more how it looked to my eye) + I also lifted the colour vibrancy and at the same time desaturated the image. Meaning then, that the colours were there, but the blue/violet on the clouds wasn't as vibrant/visible as it's here. So no to selective colouring, but yes to global colour enhancing.

And very pleased that you like the shot!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

lozers In reply to MarcWeiz [2011-09-15 18:35:52 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for the details. It would helps me a lot.
Yes, I was a bit skeptical about the extraordinary vibrating blue tint.
And the man has on him a lot of unusual light coming from behind plus the blue vibrance has done its part in painting the sand and the man's shadow in blue, all these together gives the picture a more-artificial feeling, if you don't mind.

Once again, the work is fantastic.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MarcWeiz In reply to lozers [2011-09-15 21:49:54 +0000 UTC]

Agree on what you said. But as long its according to my vision and the way I saw it, it's ok.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

minifoot In reply to MarcWeiz [2011-09-16 05:58:51 +0000 UTC]

May I add that some seem to think that photographs only should depict what is really there, whereas I think photography is just an art genre same as any other and thus all enhancements and adjustments, additions and subtractions are okay. A vision doesn't have to be a realistic one.

...
And I'm loving this photo. Not even bothered by the fact that the horizon isn't level. There are so many things that are "off" in this photo it actually makes sense.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MarcWeiz In reply to minifoot [2011-09-16 08:33:47 +0000 UTC]

I encounter the question a lot whether I have manipulated my pictures.... Well yes I have... Even the ones that don't seem manipulated are the results of processing in photoshop (I always work from raw files, which to me is quite close to working from photo negatives in a processing lab). Many times I try to explain that photos were manipulated even before the digital era to enhance their inherent quality or feeling through lightning , i.e. to mold the picture to the view of the photographer. Not that many people actually get it, even when they understand what I say. But then, most of the time professional photographers do understand it. Also, I hate the fact that people many times see photomanipulations as a lesser form of art, with the comment 'ah its manipulated'.... My background is in traditional arts - painting, drawing, etc. And I like that it shows in the work I do (especially when I do conceptual work, which I haven't yet put on display to dA that much). But now I'm just ranting

On this photo, actually my first instinct was to level the horizon as normal, but it took something away from the picture. A feeling of chaos or something, it was a gut feeling...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

minifoot In reply to MarcWeiz [2011-09-16 18:07:16 +0000 UTC]

I'm glad you didn't level it up

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MarcWeiz In reply to AndaD [2011-09-15 11:56:32 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! It was weird at that time, how fast the storm was approaching. That's what the man stood watching, and so did of course I.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0