* Practice Abstracting Essentials *

[NRich]

This is a playful opportunity to abstract essentials from a photo(s) using a digital editing filter. Using a digital filter in a creative ways may help gain new understandings of tendencies, assumptions, and perspectives that may have been passed over, or have gone unnoticed.

By using a filter we are able to strip away detail, like an x-ray to access elements that might not have made their presence felt because of a photos details or realism. You’re invited to make and share a variation using editing digital filters with headings such as Artistic, Brush stroke, Noise, or Texture, to play in the fertile ground of seeing more deeply into the possibilities of ones own photos.

The purpose here of making a filtered variation that selectively decreases detail, is not to make a “better”picture, but rather as a tool to reveal more of the visual structure, “the bare bones”, the essentials of the photo.

I enjoy exploring, sharing, and facilitating discussions around visual and artistic issues. In my experience in sharing what and how we see, we learn from each other, and Joining in can be fun.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exercise:

1. Post a photo, perhaps one that has challenged you. If you have editing software, include an exploratory digital editing filter variation(s). Please post photos that you’d welcome myself or another forum member making a follow up variation for discussion.

2. Note the filter(s) you used. Share insights the filtered variation (with less detail) gives you about the big picture, the overall structure, the expressive essentials in the photo. To fine tune the effects of a software filter in Photo Shop go to Edit- then click on “Fade Filter” to adjust the amount of filtering.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burned tree trunk in a forest: F717 - ISO 100 -2 sec.- 5.6.



In the lower left B+W variation color is filtered out, followed by a “Texture” filter with addition of noise, using a “Noise” filter. In graining the detail broad interplays of shape, proportion and tonality are brought to the fore.

The Right side variation uses a “Cut out” filter to flatten and simplify the overall image and color palette. The focus is on the relative balance of the color dynamics, the interactive proportions of the skeletal trunk, ovid shapes, and the forest surroundings.



NRich
http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

 

[LanceD]

Another interesting way to look at filter Norman. I'll give it a shot.

This is a playful opportunity to abstract essentials from a
photo(s) using a digital editing filter. Using a digital filter in
a creative ways may help gain new understandings of tendencies,
assumptions, and perspectives that may have been passed over, or
have gone unnoticed.

By using a filter we are able to strip away detail, like an x-ray
to access elements that might not have made their presence felt
because of a photos details or realism. You’re invited to make and
share a variation using editing digital filters with headings such
as Artistic, Brush stroke, Noise, or Texture, to play in the
fertile ground of seeing more deeply into the possibilities of ones
own photos.

The purpose here of making a filtered variation that selectively
decreases detail, is not to make a “better”picture, but rather as a
tool to reveal more of the visual structure, “the bare bones”, the
essentials of the photo.

I enjoy exploring, sharing, and facilitating discussions around
visual and artistic issues. In my experience in sharing what and
how we see, we learn from each other, and Joining in can be fun.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exercise:
1. Post a photo, perhaps one that has challenged you. If you have
editing software, include an exploratory digital editing filter
variation(s). Please post photos that you’d welcome myself or
another forum member making a follow up variation for discussion.

2. Note the filter(s) you used. Share insights the filtered
variation (with less detail) gives you about the big picture, the
overall structure, the expressive essentials in the photo. To fine
tune the effects of a software filter in Photo Shop go to Edit-
then click on “Fade Filter” to adjust the amount of filtering.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burned tree trunk in a forest: F717 - ISO 100 -2 sec.- 5.6.



In the lower left B+W variation color is filtered out, followed by
a “Texture” filter with addition of noise, using a “Noise” filter.
In graining the detail broad interplays of shape, proportion and
tonality are brought to the fore.

The Right side variation uses a “Cut out” filter to flatten and
simplify the overall image and color palette. The focus is on the
relative balance of the color dynamics, the interactive proportions
of the skeletal trunk, ovid shapes, and the forest surroundings.



NRich
http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

--
Lance
http://www.pbase.com/lhphoto

--- Art critic doesn't have to be an artist ----

 

[Andy Williams]

norman, what an interesting topic for our next discussion. i'm looking forward to it!
okay, here is one that i found from recent activity.

here's the original, handheld, 1.3sec, f3.2, iso 100:



here, i converted to b&w and then added grain (in photoshop, filter> texture> grain). i cloned out the sign and the lights.



the original file can be found here:
http://williams.smugmug.com/gallery/21899/7/1582237
click on "original" to get it.

-- andy
http://williams.smugmug.com - galleries

 

[Marcel-Etienne56998]

Hi Norman,

Welcome back to STF, with another great topic!

I daresay that, over the past 6 or 7 weeks, your artistic focus has been sorely missed by myself and many other people here. I believe that you'll soon see all of them join in, and contribute to this new thread.

This is a playful opportunity to abstract essentials from a
photo(s) using a digital editing filter. Using a digital filter in
a creative ways may help gain new understandings of tendencies,
assumptions, and perspectives that may have been passed over, or
have gone unnoticed.

(...)

The purpose here of making a filtered variation that selectively
decreases detail, is not to make a “better”picture, but rather as a
tool to reveal more of the visual structure, “the bare bones”, the
essentials of the photo.

Agreed. Digital (or other) filters can definitely help to better see the essential structure of a picture, and reach a new level of perception.

The Exercise:
1. Post a photo, perhaps one that has challenged you. If you have
editing software, include an exploratory digital editing filter
variation(s). Please post photos that you’d welcome myself or
another forum member making a follow up variation for discussion.

2. Note the filter(s) you used. Share insights the filtered
variation (with less detail) gives you about the big picture, the
overall structure, the expressive essentials in the photo. To fine
tune the effects of a software filter in Photo Shop go to Edit-
then click on “Fade Filter” to adjust the amount of filtering.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burned tree trunk in a forest: F717 - ISO 100 -2 sec.- 5.6.
In the lower left B+W variation color is filtered out, followed by
a “Texture” filter with addition of noise, using a “Noise” filter.
In graining the detail broad interplays of shape, proportion and
tonality are brought to the fore.
The Right side variation uses a “Cut out” filter to flatten and
simplify the overall image and color palette. The focus is on the
relative balance of the color dynamics, the interactive proportions
of the skeletal trunk, ovid shapes, and the forest surroundings.

Two great variations of a fascinating photo, which I had already noticed in your galleries! There is not much I could add here, as you have encapsulated to perfection what each variation brought to the fore; maybe I should emphasize that the flattening of the image increases its playful visual ambiguity - both photos look two- and three-dimensional at the same time, somewhere between painting and photography.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I don't have any digitally filtered variations readily available in my galleries, exceptionally I am going to cheat... just a little bit! (For the sake of this exercise, tomorrow I'll try to take some new pictures and edit them accordingly, I promise...) ;o)



For this koi picture (which you already know very well), I didn't use any digital tool, but in many ways obtained a similar effect through the use of an exceptional "natural filter" -- the slice of ice which covered the pond at that time -- and a deliberately strong increase in colour saturation, to obtain a more painterly effect . A comparison with the "realistic" version of the same photo tells the story much better than words ( http://www.pbase.com/image/15469575 ).

IMO, both realistic and painterly variations are essentially two-dimensional, although the highly saturated variation is more dynamic and visually challenging, as if it were tending towards abstraction. Please let me know what you think.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concerning the posting of other photos for you to edit, I wonder if you would like to create a variation of one of the following pictures:
http://www.pbase.com/image/23022705
or maybe
http://www.pbase.com/image/17291613 (a more difficult challenge, I guess)
or any other of your liking, The choice is yours, I don't mind at all! )
Many thanks for this great opportunity to share and discuss further.

--
Marcel-Etienne
http://www.pbase.com/braudel2001

'I don't believe in the absolute picture. There can only be approximations, experiments and beginnings, over and over again.' (Gerhard Richter)

 

[NRich]

Hi Lance,

I'll look forward to your post(s).

In this thread I would like to explore with you, ( and others ) the notion of using digital filters as an educational tool, to further see and appreciate the visual components of a photograph.

You may find this exercise beneficial in the process of simplifying an image through a filter variation, working with a photo that you consider a "near miss."

Or conversely, if you post a variation from an image you are especially pleased with, the use of filter(s), may reveal more of the hows and whys the image works.

On the up side digital filters open vast realms of choice, and encourage acccess to highly creative realms.

The challenge may be to overcome the tendency of creating special effects for there own sake (another exercise perhaps and make visual choices through filters purposeful, seeing visual essentials over and above details.

Regards,
Norman

http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

The purpose here of making a filtered variation that selectively
decreases detail, is not to make a “better”picture, but rather as a
tool to reveal more of the visual structure, “the bare bones”, the
essentials of the photo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Exercise:
1. Post a photo, perhaps one that has challenged you. If you have
editing software, include an exploratory digital editing filter
variation(s). Please post photos that you’d welcome myself or
another forum member making a follow up variation for discussion.

2. Note the filter(s) you used. Share insights the filtered
variation (with less detail) gives you about the big picture, the
overall structure, the expressive essentials in the photo. To fine
tune the effects of a software filter in Photo Shop go to Edit-
then click on “Fade Filter” to adjust the amount of filtering.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Lance
http://www.pbase.com/lhphoto

--- Art critic doesn't have to be an artist ----

 

[NRich]

Hi Andy,

This IMO is a superb contribution - both in the original and variation. Your post opens many interesting visual areas for discussion. Here are a few.

In the original I see a strong interplay of the opposite colors of orange and blue. One could think of this as a layer where the visual dialogue involves the interaction of two principal color hues.

In the variation, isolating color reveals that the mood or atmosphere can also be thought to originate in another stand alone visual layer of tonality. In the B+W filtered edit, I sense an essential substructure of expression in the photo. Does this correspond to your discoveries in making the filter variation?

I enjoy the pure blacks, midtones, and white moon. I see the broad linear sweep of the branching limbs, the overall haunting atmosphereic qualites of the photo brought to the fore in your variation. In cloning out the lamp lights and sign reflectons the bright moon is highlighted along with the tonal structure of the image as a whole.

I find in the color version the smooth sky is visually read relatively quickly. The sky original may in one sense be thought of as more detailed, with less noise, less texture, than the filter variation. Yet in the filter variation I find the grain serves to slow and involve my eye encouraging me to see and appreciate areas such as the rich progressive mid tone sky gradient.

IMO a look of smooth and creamy, or textured is of itself not "better" than the other, rather a question of photographic intent, and artistic choices from a range of possibilties.

The original might logically be thought to be more "detailed" overall, having both color in addition to tone. Yet my eye is inclinded to visually group and pass over detail drawn to the dialogue of the two bands of color. The differing qualities of "detail"can be appreciated in visual relationships highlighted in the B+W variation, when comparing the areas of the old house of two images.

In your post I am reminded one can make an artistic choice to increase visual interest through choosing less as well as more "detail", and that "Noise", may in creative terms be seen as a two way street. Depending on the expressive intent of a photo, one can choose to slow and engage the eye, through the addition of such creative means as texture or noise.

What is perceived as detail, or sharpness may not be simply be a matter of absolutes, something only to do with a camera capabilities, but also determined by visual relationships made within a photo, subject to visual awareness, and the artistic choices we make.

Andy, I've enjoyed the time I've spent with your fine photo(s)... an excellant contribution to the thread. What are your thoughts and feeling in regard to the above, having now explored this photo through a filter variation ?

Regards,
Norman

http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

norman, what an interesting topic for our next discussion. i'm
looking forward to it!
okay, here is one that i found from recent activity.

here's the original, handheld, 1.3sec, f3.2, iso 100:



here, i converted to b&w and then added grain (in photoshop,
filter> texture> grain). i cloned out the sign and the lights.



the original file can be found here:
http://williams.smugmug.com/gallery/21899/7/1582237
click on "original" to get it.

-- andy
http://williams.smugmug.com - galleries

 

[Marcel-Etienne56998]

Hello Norman,

Although because of appalling weather conditions I couldn't take any new pictures today, I have edited three variations of a photo taken in august. My two favourite ones can be seen hereunder, with links to the almost unedited original and the third variation.



("pen" variation)



("pastel" variation)
http://www.pbase.com/image/24119706 ("chalk and charcoal" variation)
http://www.pbase.com/image/23022926 (original)

It should be emphasized that in all variations, the hand, bow, viol and score were edited together, separate from the musician's body and the background (this shows most clearly in the pen-like variation, because the thin strokes have a different orientation).

IMO, in all cases the use of editing tools allowed for a more unified composition, each separate element now truly integrated into the whole picture.

Also, in the pen and pastel variations the oblique pattern of the strokes almost collided with the direction of the bow, creating an (IMO) interesting dynamic tension.

And in the case of the pastel-like picture, through a very slight use of the curves and the saturation, it was possible to fine tune the effect.

--
Marcel-Etienne
http://www.pbase.com/braudel2001

'I don't believe in the absolute picture. There can only be approximations, experiments and beginnings, over and over again.' (Gerhard Richter)

 

[Andy Williams]

Hi Andy,

This IMO is a superb contribution - both in the original and
variation. Your post opens many interesting visual areas for
discussion. Here are a few.

In the original I see a strong interplay of the opposite colors of
orange and blue. One could think of this as a layer where the
visual dialogue involves the interaction of two principal color
hues.

In the variation, isolating color reveals that the mood or
atmosphere can also be thought to originate in another stand
alone visual layer of tonality. In the B+W filtered edit, I
sense an essential substructure of expression in the photo. Does
this correspond to your discoveries in making the filter variation?

it does. when i first opened this image in its' original form, i thought: "ugh - what am i going to do with this?" i had just been practicing with b&w, so i thought - let's try it, because i thought that b&w would make it spookier

I enjoy the pure blacks, midtones, and white moon. I see the broad
linear sweep of the branching limbs, the overall haunting
atmosphereic qualites of the photo brought to the fore in your
variation. In cloning out the lamp lights and sign reflectons the
bright moon is highlighted along with the tonal structure of the
image as a whole.

yes, i saw immediately that the moon became a focal point much more so in the b&w version

I find in the color version the smooth sky is visually read
relatively quickly. The sky original may in one sense be thought
of as more detailed, with less noise, less texture, than the filter
variation. Yet in the filter variation I find the grain serves to
slow and involve my eye encouraging me to see and appreciate areas
such as the rich progressive mid tone sky gradient.

IMO a look of smooth and creamy, or textured is of itself not
"better" than the other, rather a question of photographic intent,
and artistic choices from a range of possibilties.

this was during a time when i was also practicing "stacking" images to create less-noisy sky, water, etc. so imagine my surprise when the thought to add grain** came into my head ;>

The original might logically be thought to be more "detailed"
overall, having both color in addition to tone. Yet my eye is
inclinded to visually group and pass over detail drawn to the
dialogue of the two bands of color. The differing qualities of
"detail"can be appreciated in visual relationships highlighted
in the B+W variation, when comparing the areas of the old house
of two images.

In your post I am reminded one can make an artistic choice to
increase visual interest through choosing less as well as more
"detail", and that "Noise", may in creative terms be seen as a two
way street. Depending on the expressive intent of a photo, one
can choose to slow and engage the eye, through the addition of
such creative means as texture or noise.

as soon as i added the noise in the post-process, i knew i had found something good! it was like a light switch, norman - that turned on, and turned me on - to "think outside the box."

What is perceived as detail, or sharpness may not be simply be a
matter of absolutes, something only to do with a camera
capabilities, but also determined by visual relationships made
within a photo, subject to visual awareness, and the artistic
choices we make.

Andy, I've enjoyed the time I've spent with your fine photo(s)...
an excellant contribution to the thread. What are your thoughts and
feeling in regard to the above, having now explored this photo
through a filter variation?

at the time of my edits to this image, i admit i wasn't thinking every step through as you have thoroughly and impressively analyzed here - but that's part of what makes us tick, right? being able to just do it? i don't have to always be able to explain why something works (i hope)....just knowing that "it works" is usually enough for me. now, having said that - i'm grateful to you for pointing out how i can explore beyond automatic - and think about the inter-relationships of the different photographic and editorial elements that are available for my use.

a great exercise, as usual! thank you so much for presenting it, and for yoru time, norman.

norman, what an interesting topic for our next discussion. i'm
looking forward to it!
okay, here is one that i found from recent activity.

here's the original, handheld, 1.3sec, f3.2, iso 100:



here, i converted to b&w and then added grain (in photoshop,
filter> texture> grain). i cloned out the sign and the lights.



the original file can be found here:
http://williams.smugmug.com/gallery/21899/7/1582237
click on "original" to get it.

--
-- andy
http://williams.smugmug.com - galleries

 

[EKHatch]

Great exercise. Would you suggest a filter to use on an image that has very strong outlines and a lot of shadow? I tried neon glow, cut out, and several others, but either I lose the shadow too much (which shows the form, but not the values of the image), or I just get no detail at all. I can't post the original image here, but I'll send you a link by email if you like.

e

 

[EKHatch]

The original:



Filter one: glowing edges



Filter two: cut-out (faded to about 2/3)



Commentary:

I actually posted the original earlier today; I've been not-quite-satisfied with the highlights, but can live with it (thabnks to those who said positive things, and those who had useful suggestions!) What I liked about the original was the composition and balance of masses; what I didn't like was the afore-mentioned highlighint, and the slightly below eye level camera angle.

The glowing edges treatment really sets off the use of counterbalancing masses, and the use of ovals in the composition.

The cut-out really does point out the highlight areas -- but I kind of like it, it's more relaxed than the original, while emphasizing the compositional relationships discussed above.

Over to you, Norman and others.

 

[NRich]

this was during a time when i was also practicing "stacking" images
to create less-noisy sky, water, etc. so imagine my surprise
when the thought to add grain** came into my head ;>

Hi Andy..

I appreciate your surprise & eventual enjoyment in the liberating act of * adding grain*

Over time I have come to value choice of more or less grain, more or less sharpness, and more or less DOF, according to the expressive intent of a photo. A filter variation is a little like a metaphor of a lateral slider, moving freely from side to side, dialed with sensitivity to the requirements the photo itself. This is however a contrast to a prevailing tendency of directing the slider to only one end of the spectrum of possibilities,currently labeled "best" as those having the least noise, shallowest DOF, or sharpest detail.

I also appreciate these may sound like novel ideas. Never the less it seems worthwhile to put these creative notions out there in support of those now wrestling with this and other related issues. I grant myself as a visual artist the freedom to draw upon the broadest range of visual choices, be it smooth or textured, soft or hard focus, depending on the results desired. I see no reason to offer myself less as a photographer.

In your post I am reminded one can make an artistic choice to
increase visual interest through choosing less as well as more
"detail", and that "Noise", may in creative terms be seen as a two
way street. Depending on the expressive intent of a photo, one
can choose to slow and engage the eye, through the addition of
such creative means as texture or noise.

as soon as i added the noise in the post-process, i knew i had
found something good! it was like a light switch, norman - that
turned on, and turned me on - to "think outside the box."

I feel your excitment and I identify whole heartedly with your enthusiasm! Feel free to try some more filter variations, and post back your results....Your breaking new ground and other may benefit by your example.....

Many years ago as a field archery champion, I worked at overcomimg the self imposed limits of I placed on my archery tackle equipment. When things went wrong archers would collectively blamed the bow, as a tennis player might fault their racket for a miss. I mistakenly believed I could shoot no better than the equipment, until one day I discovered in amazement it was possible to shoot a group of arrows in a smaller circle than the sight could be held in.

This has always remained an empowering event in my imagination. In that moment I discovered it is the archer that hits the bulls eye, not the bow, as it is the photographer that creates the photo, and not the camera.

What is perceived as detail, or sharpness may not be simply be a
matter of absolutes, something only to do with a camera
capabilities, but also determined by visual relationships made
within a photo, subject to visual awareness, and the artistic
choices we make.

Andy, I've enjoyed the time I've spent with your fine photo(s)...
an excellant contribution to the thread. What are your thoughts and
feeling in regard to the above, having now explored this photo
through a filter variation?

at the time of my edits to this image, i admit i wasn't thinking
every step through as you have thoroughly and impressively analyzed
here - but that's part of what makes us tick, right? being able to
just do it? i don't have to always be able to explain why
something works (i hope)....just knowing that "it works" is
usually enough for me.

Agreed, ...Photography matters by the doing of it. When I'm in the field I find myself shooting very intuitively, and whole months go by in summers- all doing, and no writing. I see winter as holding reflection opportunities and make time to explore with interested photgraphers the whats, why's, and how's we see, in threads such as these.

now, having said that - i'm grateful to you
for pointing out how i can explore beyond automatic - and think
about the inter-relationships of the different photographic and
editorial elements that are available for my use.
a great exercise, as usual! thank you so much for presenting it,
and for your time, norman.

Your contributions in the thread are most appreciated .... For yourself and the benefit of others you are welcome to share with us a more filter variations, and I will share more in the course of the thread.
http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

norman, what an interesting topic for our next discussion. i'm
looking forward to it!
okay, here is one that i found from recent activity.

here's the original, handheld, 1.3sec, f3.2, iso 100:
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/1582237-M .
here, i converted to b&w and then added grain (in photoshop,
filter> texture> grain). i cloned out the sign and the lights.
http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/1582239-M .

the original file can be found here:
http://williams.smugmug.com/gallery/21899/7/1582237
click on "original" to get it.

--
-- andy
http://williams.smugmug.com - galleries

 

[Gordon W]

Interesting topic, although it's been quite a while since I did anything along these lines. At one point, my wife thought we should hang some of my photography around the house, but I personally prefer the look of traditional art for wall art, so as a compromise I developed several techniques that attempted to make my photos look more like art. In fact, my goal was to have the final result not look like a photo at all, even from a distance.

Three of the techniques can be seen here...

http://www.pbase.com/merriwolf/big_ben_art

I chose this photo because it is one of the few that worked with all three techniques. Usually an image works much better with one technique than the others, so I don't have many that show a comparison like this does, which (ahum...please forgive me) was shot with a Nikon (evident by lack of saturation) I had before I bought an F707. However, the techniques work with images from any camera, of course, and remove so much detail that resolution becomes unimportant.

If there is any interest in how these were done, I'll dig out the procedures. I also made Photoshop Actions for them at the time, which broke with the next version of Photoshop (5 to 6, I think), but again, if there's enough interest in any of these techniques I could update the Actions and post them.

In any case, if anyone has comments (good or bad) or suggestions for improvements I'd be most interested in hearing them.

Gordon

 

[NRich]

Hi Norman,

The purpose here of making a filtered variation that selectively
decreases detail, is not to make a “better”picture, but rather as a
tool to reveal more of the visual structure, “the bare bones”, the
essentials of the photo.

Agreed. Digital (or other) filters can definitely help to better
see the essential structure of a picture, and reach a new level of
perception.

Hi Marcel,

Yes, I am proposing purposefully exploring digital filters as a visual learning tool.

The Exercise:
1. Post a photo, perhaps one that has challenged you. If you have
editing software, include an exploratory digital editing filter
variation(s). Please post photos that you’d welcome myself or
another forum member making a follow up variation for discussion.

2. Note the filter(s) you used. Share insights the filtered
variation (with less detail) gives you about the big picture, the
overall structure, the expressive essentials in the photo. To fine
tune the effects of a software filter in Photo Shop go to Edit-
then click on “Fade Filter” to adjust the amount of filtering.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.pbase.com/image/15469507 .
For this koi picture (which you already know very well), I didn't
use any digital tool, but in many ways obtained a similar effect
through the use of an exceptional "natural filter" -- the slice of
ice which covered the pond at that time

This fine Koi image is from such an interesting gallery, here using the varigated frozen ice pond surface as a natural filter. I am especially fond of what you and Pondria have done photgraphically around ponds, proceeding in a depth that seemingly holds unlimited realms of inspiration. I'd like to leave this fine image for the moment, so as to focus in further on how a digital filter might be used as a further means of seeing a photo.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concerning the posting of other photos for you to edit, I wonder if
you would like to create a variation .....
.....or any other of your liking, The choice is yours,...
Many thanks for this great opportunity to share and discuss further.

To follow up on your offer, I'd like to work with you with this delightfull snail photo from your gallery: linked at medium size below:



I have chosen a filter for the purpose of seeing more of the bare bones shapes, and their essential visual relations within the photo. Here I have chosen to flatten the image with a stamp filter, that creates an even flatter effect than a "cut out" filter, to focus in on the overall existing spacial figure/ground relationships, below:



I have made the above filter to consider other posibilites and additional options, including a vertical, or horizontal crop varying the spacial proportions within the rectangle. I'm imagining an alternate balance that might (for example), allow for isolating the snails cape with a red mask, adding more dimensionality through the selective use of levels.

If you feel inclined, I'd like to see where this filter "stamp" pattern variation might lead you in an alternate edit of this charming image.

Lets follow-up & discuss this process in a little more depth using this example

over to you......

Regards,
Norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

--
Marcel-Etienne
http://www.pbase.com/braudel2001
'I don't believe in the absolute picture. There can only be
approximations, experiments and beginnings, over and over again.'
(Gerhard Richter)

 

[Jose Noway]

Hello Norman-- Here are my entries:

The original (Oct 2003): the paddleboats at the lake in a local park. It's a small lake, overloaded with ducks and geese... and without much in the way of filtration. The water's not stagnant, but pretty close to it. The boats are looking a bit bedraggled these days, but I have wonderful and vivid memories of them from my childhood.



First experiment (Nov 2003): I used an accented edges filter on this one-- initially I just wanted to "degunk" the water, but then used a soft light layer blend mode, which saturated the colors and simplified the shapes in a way that was pleasing to me.



Second experiment (today): For your exercise, I went back to try the cutout filter on the image, which happens to be one of my very favorite filters. It doesn't look much different than the first idea, unless you zoom into it. Overall, I think the edges filter worked toward my goal better than the cutout filter did.



I know you didn't mean for this exercise to be about the cutout filter, but I found an image in my stash where I'd used it. I love what it did here. I think it works because the range of colors is limited, with fairly close values.

 

[NRich]

Hi Eric,

The original:

I enjoy the expressive qualites of intelligence, sensitivity, and dignity I see conveyed in this portrait. Please consider the following comments as referring to small optionable fine tunings. With this in mind I’d like to explore with you a few thoughts how a filter variation as a means to an end, might be of use in portraiture.

In the two B+W variations a “fresco” filter, was used and gradated in the fade slider. The variation above is an approximate translation of the original in B+W, in a broad treatment, with tones condensed in their range.
Http: www.pbase.com/image/24159756.jpg

I also respond to aspects of the overall posture, grouping of the shapes, and "balance of masses" that you pointed out, and see value in both the variations you posted.

I am reading the pants and hands as being similar sized and tonaly closely related, as is a second pairing of the black shirt and dark background. I noted a narrowing of the vertical proportions of the rectangle, and find the left hand appears slightly oversized and advancing forward within the picture plane in size proportion to the head. small tonal bleeding points, hardly visible in the original,are more apparent in the variation at the lower right arm, and another at the curtain and elbow.
Http: www.pbase.com/image/24160108.jpg

I was interested to see what small adjustments to the fresco variation(above) might look like with a version, based on the above observations, and make a second edit, to the above B+W "fresco variation". The tone of the pants selected with the red mask and deepened toward a middle tone, the shirt lightened slightly. The hand areas a small crop , one means of addressing the scale issue, another shooting the hand(s) in full a little closer to the body.

If you found some aspects of this variation useful, and you have the time, it would be interesting to see how your filter variations plus the "fresco" filter observations might be subtlely translated to the color original.

Regards,
Norman

http://www.pbase.com/norman

Filter one: glowing edges

http://www.pbase.com/image/24123677 .

Filter two: cut-out (faded to about 2/3)

http://www.pbase.com/image/24123670 .

Commentary:

I actually posted the original earlier today; I've been
not-quite-satisfied with the highlights, but can live with it
(thabnks to those who said positive things, and those who had
useful suggestions!) What I liked about the original was the
composition and balance of masses; what I didn't like was the
afore-mentioned highlighint, and the slightly below eye level
camera angle.

The glowing edges treatment really sets off the use of
counterbalancing masses, and the use of ovals in the composition.

The cut-out really does point out the highlight areas -- but I kind
of like it, it's more relaxed than the original, while emphasizing
the compositional relationships discussed above.

Over to you, Norman and others.

 

[Marcel-Etienne56998]

To follow up on your offer, I'd like to work with you with this
delightfull snail photo from your gallery: linked at medium size
below:
http://www.pbase.com/image/17236629

I have chosen a filter for the purpose of seeing more of the bare
bones shapes, and their essential visual relations within the
photo. Here I have chosen to flatten the image with a stamp
filter, that creates an even flatter effect than a "cut out"
filter, to focus in on the overall existing spacial figure/ground
relationships, below:



I have made the above filter to consider other posibilites and
additional options, including a vertical, or horizontal crop
varying the spacial proportions within the rectangle. I'm
imagining an alternate balance that might (for example), allow for
isolating the snails cape with a red mask, adding more
dimensionality through the selective use of levels.

If you feel inclined, I'd like to see where this filter "stamp"
pattern variation might lead you in an alternate edit of this
charming image.

Norman,
As you kindly suggested, I have tried two variations with the stamp filter:





Colours, contrast, etc, are identical, but the cropping is different. The first image has been reduced to a square, with IMO two main results: the emphasis has been put on the snail cape, and the whole composition, although balanced, is rather static.

I personally find the second, elongated version, more satisfactory for two reasons. Firstly, the attention is no longer distracted by the second snail shell in the upper part, most of which has now been cut out. Secondly, the composition is more dynamic, with some tension induced by the contrast between the snail on the right side, and the empty left side.

For the fun, I have also tried another filter, but I am none too sure how I should call it in english (maybe reticulate?) Whatever the correct name, I put the density at zero and played a little bit with the colours to create a two-tone variation, with a strange, almost X-ray effect:



What all three variations have in common, is the emphasis put on the essential components of the image, the eye being less easily distracted by the less important details.

--
Marcel-Etienne
http://www.pbase.com/braudel2001

'I don't believe in the absolute picture. There can only be approximations, experiments and beginnings, over and over again.' (Gerhard Richter)

 

[NRich]

Interesting topic, although it's been quite a while since I did
anything along these lines. At one point, my wife thought we should
hang some of my photography around the house, but I personally
prefer the look of traditional art for wall art, so as a compromise
I developed several techniques that attempted to make my photos
look more like art. In fact, my goal was to have the final result
not look like a photo at all, even from a distance.

Hello Gordon,

I see you are comfortable with exploring visual options in the digital darkroom. I enjoyed your three painterly filter variations linked below, also the inventiveness of your race car collage, and the welcome fine tuning of the F828 photos from the Sony site in your galleries. Thank you for making the time to contribute to this thread.

I see the advent of digital filters opening for photographers a vast range of use, with new and innovative applications. I am interested in the practice of using a filter specifically as a visual learning tool.

Several interesting visual ideas arose in your post that can be explored further in follow ups,for example the notion of making "photos look more like art." When a photo "looks more like art", often the artists process is evident. In works of Art one often sees or senses the artists Intent where there is a concentration of purpose.

As a painter I proceed from a blank canvas. It is essentially an additive process. The medium of photography may be seen more as a subtractive process, editing out what is not relevant. Visual artists have the benefit of choosing to draw upon sketches, to formulate what it is one wants to say, and how to say it. Artists paths can be thought of a growth process revolving around the kind and quality of * Visual Choices* one makes.

A photos may on the other hand may appear in an instant, automatically with the click of a shutter, along with an overabundance of detail information. Digital filters, may be used like a traditional sketch, as a fluid working procedure to simply and concentrate Intent .

A digital filter may be used purposefully to strip away photo details to gain greater awareness of its abstracted essentials. In becoming more attentive to creative process and visual choices we may be less anxious for a magic bullet fix from a camera, enjoying more fully ones own sustainable growth process.

I also enjoyed your comment that "removing so much detail that resolution becomes unimportant."- Perhaps in this comment - a breakthrough for a reader to this thread. Into the vacumm that is left when preoccupation with detail is gone - ones attention may return to the larger picture, cores of inspiration, and the bare bones expressive essence of a photo.

You'd be most welcome to renew old filter interests, with a try at this new usage.

Regards,
Norman

http://www.pbase.com/norman
http://www.pbase.com/norman/sailing_north

Three of the techniques can be seen here...

http://www.pbase.com/merriwolf/big_ben_art

I chose this photo because it is one of the few that worked with
all three techniques. Usually an image works much better with one
technique than the others, so I don't have many that show a
comparison like this does, which (ahum...please forgive me) was
shot with a Nikon (evident by lack of saturation) I had before I
bought an F707. However, the techniques work with images from any
camera, of course, and remove so much detail that resolution
becomes unimportant.

If there is any interest in how these were done, I'll dig out the
procedures. I also made Photoshop Actions for them at the time,
which broke with the next version of Photoshop (5 to 6, I think),
but again, if there's enough interest in any of these techniques I
could update the Actions and post them.

In any case, if anyone has comments (good or bad) or suggestions
for improvements I'd be most interested in hearing them.

Gordon

 

[Gordon W]

The 300D and F717 are the two most often mentioned cameras as alternative choices to the F828 and it would be of the utmost benefit it seems to me to compare them, as unfair as a comparison to the 300D might be.

The two most important characteristics to me are noise and resolution, followed closely by lens quality.

Gordon

 

[Gordon W]

Sorry, meant this for another thread.

 

[Marcel-Etienne56998]

Gordon,

Unless I am mistaken, you have unitentionally hit the wrong thread this time... but thanks for bringing it back on top! ;o)

The 300D and F717 are the two most often mentioned cameras as
alternative choices to the F828 and it would be of the utmost
benefit it seems to me to compare them, as unfair as a comparison
to the 300D might be.

The two most important characteristics to me are noise and
resolution, followed closely by lens quality.

Gordon

--
Marcel-Etienne
http://www.pbase.com/braudel2001

'I don't believe in the absolute picture. There can only be approximations, experiments and beginnings, over and over again.' (Gerhard Richter)