LA MONTANA MAGICA (MAGIC MOUNTAIN)

[unpopular]

It's not that you're wrong, bro. It's the arrogance you're coming across with that's bothering people. You seem like you throw around your qualifications a lot.

It'd be a lot more effective if you'd just say "I disagree ... here's why" and not "I disagree, here's my qualifications"

 

[vipgraphx]

Yeah i get your point. I am not really good with forums as I have only been apart of two forums and this one people seem to be more blunt.I thought I was Explaining why and not trying to through out qualifications out. I thought it was a thorough answer.

 

[unpopular]

Though still.

I think that if you over-rely on these filters your work will become stale. It has been my experience that a graphic artist's job is to determine and provide your client's look, and not so much your preference. The last thing a client wants is to be branded by you.

--

I still maintain that this pseudo HDR effect can be achieved without filters. They are nothing but local contrast adjustments, and my bet is that they can be achieved using the highpass filter. In fact, I recall reading this on another forum:

Relic

The effect does get close, and I bet this teq can be modified to prevent decreased saturation. As for time consumption, that's what actions are for, right?

 

[vipgraphx]

You have to understand that I do not make a living of of photography. I make a living off of screen prinilting , uniforms, printing and graphic design work such as logos advertising and banners.I do a very good job listening to my clients and creating art work that meets their needs not mine. I use illustrator mostly for my line art(vector) I do side jobs with photgography but at this point it's mainly for me as a hobby.

 

[unpopular]

I have a pretty broad array of design experience, everything from two color logos to six color magazine covers to pre-show, in-theater advertisement on two-story tall movie screens. I have never been tempted to get these kinds of filters. I always felt I could communicate the same kind of ideas without them in ways that are more controlled and less "Topaz Adjust - like". I suppose if a client absolutely insisted on it, I could run a tonemap through LuminanceHDR, or do some local contrast work using a hp filter.

I don't think I've ever seen an ad agency that uses these plugins, I have never been recommended I buy them by professors or other professionals and I've never been on a job site that had them installed.

I think when push comes to shove, these filters are popular amongst some photographers, especially hobbyists, but i don't think they have a whole lot of professional use, at least not in the graphic arts field simply because they lack a degree of sophistication.

That said, I do think they might have uses as an intermediate step. I just am not sure that they're worth the money. At least not to me.

 

[vipgraphx]

I dont use these filters in graphic design work. They are photo filters and like I said before there were times when i use to airbrush photos as part of digital restoration and it would have been nice to save time and have a filter that would do this for me. Now I do and when I need to use it I will. Most of my paid work has nothing to do with photography, once again its a hobby and I do photo shoots on the side (portraits and family shoots) If a client wants a softening filter I use photoshop but thats about as far as it goes with filters with clients. I had one recent photo shoot that they wanted me to make it look like a painting so I tone-mapped it. Other than that I agree with you about these not being something in the industry as for the past 10 years I never used them with my day to day job. It was not until I got into landscape photography that I started using them. For my own purpose!

Why has this discussion gotten this far. I post a thread of some picture I took and stated why I did what I did and I get questioned about it. I already explained why. That was not good enough for you then I answered again I thought we both came to the end at "eye candy". If you don't like it cool just say it and be done with it but having to question why, well I think thats a little off topic. Read through your post in this thread and see where it took curve. You started a response and Bynx even questioned your response.

Its not that your not entitled to your opinion, any thing constructive I will take into consideration but just to simply say "The problem with images that are driven by technique and not by subject is that once you've seen one, you've seen them all. It gets stale very quickly" is not a fact its an opinion why else would these types of pictures be displayed all over the internet.

Have you seen Stuck In Customs HDR Photography ? That guy makes a living doing HDR and uses all these programs himself along with others. Is he not a professional? You may know many people that don't use them but there is always a flip side to that and those that do. Just because your professors have not recommended them to you does not mean they can not be used to achieve professional results.

Once again I agree with you in the sense that in graphic design work they are not necessary and or needed for most jobs. I would not tone map a logo or use a skin softener for a website you are right. As far as photography goes I don't know I am not a professional photographer and I have not interviewed or done a pole on who uses these plugins in their professional work. I would assume that there are a lot that do and a lot that don't but its not safe to assume so I don't. I don't tell people anything like its a fact. IF its an opinion I will simply say it and say its my opinion.

 

[Bynx]

Vip, you are wasting your time. Unpopular is an idiot, who is so full of crap Im betting his eyes are brown. He clearly doesnt know what he is spewing and replying to his nonsense is just feeding his fire. He doesnt like HDR but he hangs around the forum just to stir the pot.

 

[unpopular]

Bynx- have you even read what I have been saying? Seems to me you're too busy defending HDR.

---

First, grow up. I'm not going to disclaim everything I say as being an opinion, you should be secure enough realize that. Who cares if I think my opinion is 'fact'? I'm not the boss of you, so stop whining.

I never EVER said that I dislike HDR, or even so-called extreme HDR. I've used it myself, and I like the results. But the image must benefit from the technique, not the other way around. If you cannot see that many of the images at Stuck In Customs do benefit from the technique - that they are crafted images which have been edited in such a way to maximize their usefulness as HDR and that each image is unique, not the result of some fancy-pants filter - that many are first good images before being hdr images and that the HDR processing benefits each image individually then you have no idea what photography is in the first place.

HDR should be first and foremost about extending dynamic range, not just an excuse to be too lazy and impatient to wait for better lighting or learn how to use a camera without clipping the sky, or in order to get some gimmicky effect that looks "cool". Photography is about the subject.

 

[SlickSalmon]

Back to the original image for a moment... If I download this image and view it in Photoshop, it's much fuller, richer and more evenly balanced than the image that appears in this thread, even when viewed side-by-side on the same, calibrated monitor. This isn't the first time I've seen images getting significantly altered by the act up uploading and posting. So, I think we ought not get too critical of images that appear in forum posts unless they show obvious defects like haloing and fluorescent-level saturation.

 

[unpopular]

^^ the problem is that you are not using a color managed browser, or for some reason color management is not enabled or functioning.

 

[Bynx]

Ive noticed the exact same thing Slick. I always upload an image to tinypic and they give me the url to paste into the post here. Images can often loose a lot in terms of sharpness and some color shift. Haloing and fluorescent saturation is strictly the tone mapping errors of the OP.

 

[vipgraphx]

I noticed when using photobucket it made the images softer and so I prefer flickr which seems to keep a better image quality. I am not sure about color never really noticed that part.

 

[SlickSalmon]

Ive noticed the exact same thing Slick. I always upload an image to tinypic and they give me the url to paste into the post here. Images can often loose a lot in terms of sharpness and some color shift. Haloing and fluorescent saturation is strictly the tone mapping errors of the OP.

Thanks, Bynx. I just want to get past the name calling to a useful critique. I put up three versions of this image on a calibrated monitor: 1) color managed photoshop, 2) non-color managed .jpg, and 3) the forum post displayed with the non-color-managed Safari browser. The forum post was by far the worst of the three. The color-managed photoshop version was the best. I think it's an assertive, interpretative image, but I also think it would make a more striking print than the forum post would suggest.

 

[Bynx]

I wonder if it makes any difference if you use sRGB color profile when saving the files. But I cant see how that would help the soft focus I seem to often notice.

 

[vipgraphx]

SlickSalmon, thanks for getting the thread back on topic. The Rock is the main subject and the added color in the sky, lens flare and other things I did was all to back up the name of the title "Magic Mountain" I chose this picture out of the bunch from our Mt. Lemon trip because I thought it had the best composition and when taking the photo I tried to follow the rule of thirds. On this huge mountain there is only one spot that has these distinctive rock formations.