Flickr

W
Posted By
Waterspider
Jan 6, 2008
Views
505
Replies
26
Status
Closed
Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

Waterspider

Powered by Creative Market

K
KatWoman
Jan 6, 2008
"Waterspider" wrote in message
Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

Waterspider

weed and cats (a very pretty one too)
you’re OK in my book

I put a few pics on flickr
I may remove them though
so far two men who favorited my images used them to add to their jerk-off collections of women and women’s parts
so post your family and kids at your own risk

I got a couple cute things on my sets
some stuff we chatted up

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kw-retouch/sets/
K
krash
Jan 7, 2008
Spydie…
I don’t have pix on flickr, but I have at my website… www.lookingatyou.ca a few have manipulation done on them.

I peeked at your shots, very nice… you live in a beautiful place, my uncle used to live on N. Pender, but it was a LONG time ago we visited and I don’t remember much of it…. just lots of trees… I am in Vernon, in the Okanagan…

Good day from the hinterlands… :o) kk


=>Kevin Kienlein – Entertainer/Inspirational Speaker/Photographer =>Vernon, BC, Canada
=> www.kevinkienlein.com www.lookingatyou.ca
=>Never give in, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!
=>Life is the Gig, THIS AIN’T NO REHEARSAL!
=>Age 47/Tricuspid, Atresia, Atrial & Vent, Septal Defects. =>My Congenital Heart Defects

"Waterspider" wrote in message
Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

Waterspider

D
Dave
Jan 7, 2008
"Waterspider" wrote:

Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

You talk as if Flickr is the only place where photos can be displayed, Waterspider. Here is my contribution.

I am busy paging through your photos – very interesting

Dave
http://dave.photos.gb.net/list_collections.php
http://home.intekom.com/davesplace/durban.html
S
samandjanet
Jan 7, 2008
Waterspider wrote:
Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

LOL. You’ve seen my work in your Flickr contacts list already.
K
KatWoman
Jan 8, 2008
"(not quite so) Fat Sam" wrote in
message
Waterspider wrote:
Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant, but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

LOL. You’ve seen my work in your Flickr contacts list already.

I used it for this group b/c you all already used it

I have other service for personal and family pictures passworded another free host
http://xs.to
P
Peter
Jan 12, 2008
"Dave" wrote in message
"Waterspider" wrote:

Does anyone have photos on Flickr that they’d like to share with alt.graphics.photoshop members? I’m more of a agp lurker than a participant,
but am curious to see photos taken/shopped by others here. I’ll show you mine if you show me yours…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/myrwin/

I realize that posting a Flickr link on Usenet could make some people anxious about confidentiality, and I understand that. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass who knows who I am and doubt that anyone would care. Your mileage may vary.

You talk as if Flickr is the only place where photos can be displayed, Waterspider. Here is my contribution.

I am busy paging through your photos – very interesting

Dave
http://dave.photos.gb.net/list_collections.php
http://home.intekom.com/davesplace/durban.html

I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do I see some Painter like work?


Peter
D
Dave
Jan 12, 2008
, "Peter"
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do I see some Painter like work?

Correct Peter, and it sound as if you have Painter experience – right? Some of the work ìs done in Painter – I usually combine Painter and Photoshop. They are neighbors and work together without any struggles and hassles

Dave
J
Joel
Jan 12, 2008
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?
D
Dave
Jan 12, 2008
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:12:02 -0600, Joel wrote:

"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

True,.. I do not know whether you are talking to Peter or myself now, but it is general knowledge that PS can do painting as well. Still, you do not buy parts for a Mazda at a Ford garage.

Dave
P
Peter
Jan 13, 2008
"Dave" wrote in message
, "Peter"
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Correct Peter, and it sound as if you have Painter experience – right?

I consider myself an advanced photographer (60+ years experience) who enjoys creating photos that look like paintings. (I used to attempt to create painterly effects using purely darkroom techniques.) I am reletively new to digital work. A beginner with Painter and a user with about 1.5 years of self taught experience with PS.


Peter
P
Peter
Jan 13, 2008
"Joel" wrote in message
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

Although they may very well exist, I have not seen the documented variety of brushes for use with PS, that there is with Painter. Nor does PS offer the variety of papers and canvas effects that comes standard with PainterX. I see little reason to struggle to get an effect in PS that I can easily get using Painter.
..
I agree that PainterX has some serious issues when used with PS: levels and curves layers must be flattened;
it does not take 16 bit images;
it can be slow on images greater than 300 dpi;
its enlargement algorithms are not as good as with PS.
Therefore, like Dave I am prefer to combine the strengths of the two programs. Personally, I want to spend more time creating the image than looking at alternative ways to do so. YMMV.
That said, I look forward to learning much from you and the other members of this group.


Peter
J
Joel
Jan 13, 2008
Dave wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:12:02 -0600, Joel wrote:

"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

True,.. I do not know whether you are talking to Peter or myself now, but it is general knowledge that PS can do painting as well. Still, you do not buy parts for a Mazda at a Ford garage.
Dave

I often don’t pay attention to the name of poster, and usually response to the message itself. And if you like art then as I suggested that you may want to do some research on "History Brush" and use "History Brush" tool to give you a WOW!

Lets see if I can find some to get you a good started.. Here is one

http://www.trimoon.com <=- you can see samples and *free* brushes here http://www.npg.si.edu/cexh/brush/index.HTM
http://livedocs.adobe.com/en_US/Photoshop/10.0/help.html?con tent=WSfd1234e1c4b69f30ea53e41001031ab64-7805.html
http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tutorials/jf/art-history-bru sh-painting-effect/art-history-brush-tutorial.html

Too many and many of them don’t have good detail art work (not my style as I usually only do Art History Brush on portrait), or I can’t check them all to paste the link here <bg>

Also, Art History Brush works similar to Tracing/Cloning so you won’t have to be an artist to create some stunning art work, and it shouldn’t take more than few minutes etc..
W
Waterspider
Jan 13, 2008
"Peter" wrote in message
"Dave" wrote in message
, "Peter"
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Correct Peter, and it sound as if you have Painter experience – right?

I consider myself an advanced photographer (60+ years experience)…

Cool. I’m not the oldest one here <g>
K
KatWoman
Jan 13, 2008
"Peter" wrote in message
"Joel" wrote in message
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for
you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

Although they may very well exist, I have not seen the documented variety of brushes for use with PS, that there is with Painter. Nor does PS offer the variety of papers and canvas effects that comes standard with PainterX. I see little reason to struggle to get an effect in PS that I can easily get using Painter.
.
I agree that PainterX has some serious issues when used with PS: levels and curves layers must be flattened;
it does not take 16 bit images;
it can be slow on images greater than 300 dpi;
its enlargement algorithms are not as good as with PS.
Therefore, like Dave I am prefer to combine the strengths of the two programs. Personally, I want to spend more time creating the image than looking at alternative ways to do so. YMMV.
That said, I look forward to learning much from you and the other members of this group.


Peter

I loved the history brush techniques
never tried them
very inspiring

as for
I have not seen the documented variety of
brushes for use with PS

FWIW PS can make any BW IMAGE into a CUSTOM brush

there are so many brush options and so many sets already created and freely shared to download at Adobe Exchange

I made custom eyelash shaped brushes!!
you can make your signature a brush
I got crazy brushes-Vargas girls, columns and porticos, all kind textures, blotches, ink drops, pearls, jewels
anything

see my screenshots re using brushes
from version CS
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kw-retouch
K
KatWoman
Jan 13, 2008
"KatWoman" wrote in message
"Peter" wrote in message
"Joel" wrote in message
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for
you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

Although they may very well exist, I have not seen the documented variety of brushes for use with PS, that there is with Painter. Nor does PS offer the variety of papers and canvas effects that comes standard with PainterX. I see little reason to struggle to get an effect in PS that I can easily get using Painter.
.
I agree that PainterX has some serious issues when used with PS: levels and curves layers must be flattened;
it does not take 16 bit images;
it can be slow on images greater than 300 dpi;
its enlargement algorithms are not as good as with PS.
Therefore, like Dave I am prefer to combine the strengths of the two programs. Personally, I want to spend more time creating the image than looking at alternative ways to do so. YMMV.
That said, I look forward to learning much from you and the other members of this group.


Peter

I loved the history brush techniques
never tried them
very inspiring

as for
I have not seen the documented variety of
brushes for use with PS

FWIW PS can make any BW IMAGE into a CUSTOM brush

there are so many brush options and so many sets already created and freely shared to download at Adobe Exchange

I made custom eyelash shaped brushes!!
you can make your signature a brush
I got crazy brushes-Vargas girls, columns and porticos, all kind textures, blotches, ink drops, pearls, jewels
anything

see my screenshots re using brushes
from version CS
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kw-retouch
oops it was down
a more specific link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kw-retouch/tags/screenshot/
P
Peter
Jan 14, 2008
"KatWoman" wrote in message

I loved the history brush techniques
never tried them
very inspiring

as for
I have not seen the documented variety of
brushes for use with PS

FWIW PS can make any BW IMAGE into a CUSTOM brush

there are so many brush options and so many sets already created and freely shared to download at Adobe Exchange

I made custom eyelash shaped brushes!!
you can make your signature a brush
I got crazy brushes-Vargas girls, columns and porticos, all kind textures, blotches, ink drops, pearls, jewels
anything

see my screenshots re using brushes
from version CS
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kw-retouch

Thanks, you have now opened up a huge variety of new tools and toys to distract me from my projects. Those who know me will bet the ranch that I will keep myself busy learning exactly what each and every one of those brushes and filters will do. I am determined to fool them and just do my thing. But how can I ignore the wonderful world you have just made me aware of. Here I was, happy in my ignorance and you have gone ahead and spoiled that.

(seriously, thanks for the information.)


Peter
J
Joel
Jan 14, 2008
"Peter" wrote:

"Joel" wrote in message
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
I enjoyed seeing your creative approach. Were all of these done in PS, or do
I see some Painter like work?

Photoshop can do imaging painter like work. Or may be it’s about time for you to do some research on "History Brush" and Google for some free brush(es)?

Although they may very well exist, I have not seen the documented variety of brushes for use with PS, that there is with Painter. Nor does PS offer the variety of papers and canvas effects that comes standard with PainterX. I see little reason to struggle to get an effect in PS that I can easily get using Painter.

Corel PainterX’s Quick-Clone may seem to be easier to some newbie, but if you know Photoshop well then Corel PainterX’s Quick-Clone isn’t that good. The other regular painting mode then Corel PainterX has more painting (brush) tools than Photoshop which is more to photo retouching than painting.

But if you have good History Brush and good practicing then you may find that Photoshop History Brush is much easier and better than Corel PainterX.

I agree that PainterX has some serious issues when used with PS: levels and curves layers must be flattened;
it does not take 16 bit images;
it can be slow on images greater than 300 dpi;
its enlargement algorithms are not as good as with PS.
Therefore, like Dave I am prefer to combine the strengths of the two programs. Personally, I want to spend more time creating the image than looking at alternative ways to do so. YMMV.
That said, I look forward to learning much from you and the other members of this group.

I know how to use History Brush option, but it would take forever for me to write all small detail. So I will try to give you guys the very basic general information.

1. History Brush works very similar to TRACING

a. You load the IMAGE you want to turn to art

b. Load a canvas (texture) or just a blank layer on top.

2. Select History Brush and the History Brush you want to use (the History Brush has Color Tray symbol), then start painting on the top layer. And the bottom image start revealing with randomized art line brush.

a. *If* you keep the brush on same spot then the brush shape will continue to change to your liking or til you move the brush away

b. The effect will also depend on the Brush Size and Opacity. Just like regular brush.

– If you want MORE DETAIL of the original then you reduce the brush size

c. I usually use Large Brush Size to go over the whole canvas, then reduce the brush size to slowly go other the edge, and detail area like EYES, MOUTH etc..

3. After few minutes messing with the above (shouldn’t take long) then you will need some Photoshop skill to fine-tune detail area like eyes, mouth etc.. by using something like

– Erase Tool (or Mask) to erase some messy brush stroke to bring up the *original* from lower layer. Of course you can use History Brush only *but* why wasting time and hoping for a lucky brush stroke when you can take advantage of Photoshop skill to get thing done much quicker and easier.

And that’s about it! then you can use many different tools, techniques to fine-tune the art. And it shouldn’t take more than 3-10 minutes (depending on how well you know Photoshop). And you use use multiple layer of arts too.
J
Joel
Jan 14, 2008
"Peter" wrote:

<snip>
Thanks, you have now opened up a huge variety of new tools and toys to distract me from my projects. Those who know me will bet the ranch that I will keep myself busy learning exactly what each and every one of those brushes and filters will do. I am determined to fool them and just do my thing. But how can I ignore the wonderful world you have just made me aware of. Here I was, happy in my ignorance and you have gone ahead and spoiled that.

(seriously, thanks for the information.)

ME? I would suggest to stop messing with filter as it’s usually a lazy tool to make you become lazier. That’s based on my very own experience, cuz just like most if not all Photoshop users I ..

1. Spent few years staring at Photoshop cuz I had no idea what to start

2. Wasting few years messing with plug-in to impress family member and friend etc even deep inside me telling me to start learning the real strength of Photoshop.

3. Then I decided to stop messing around with plug-in (they just can’t impress me <bg>) to start learning to use the real Photoshop. It took me few years to get to know Photoshop better.

Then more serious on exploding Photoshop like more layer, more masking etc.. and I am looking forwards to learn more about blending mode etc..
D
Dave
Jan 15, 2008
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:47:09 -0600, Joel wrote:

Corel PainterX’s Quick-Clone may seem to be easier to some newbie, but if you know Photoshop well then Corel PainterX’s Quick-Clone isn’t that good. The other regular painting mode then Corel PainterX has more painting (brush) tools than Photoshop which is more to photo retouching than painting.

But if you have good History Brush and good practicing then you may find that Photoshop History Brush is much easier and better than Corel PainterX.

I bought
Painter IX for Photographers: Creating Painterly Images
Martin Addison (Author)

Painter IX Wow! Book by Cher Threinen-Pendarvis

Painter IX Creativity by Jeremy Sutton

I also bought
Lynda.com tutorial CD’s on Painter IX
and
Lynda.com’s tutorial CD’s on Poser 7

Times earlier, before buying the books mentioned above,
I bought (under more):

Photoshop CS by Colin Smith
&
Adobe Photoshop CS2 for photographers
by Martin Evening.
(and more books on PS, but this is what
I took from my library after reading your clever comments) and none of these Photoshop books could teach me to paint. One day while browsing books in Incredible Books,
I’ve seen Russell Brown saying something to the effect of: "you should buy Corel Painter if you want to do digital painting." Please do not ask me to quote this book, because I can not recall the title, but this was only one sentence mentioning this.

I also have email contact with Cher Threinen-Pendarvis.

*
If only for one moment in doubt, ask me and I will post a photo of the books in my library. I also buy monthly magazines on PS and Painter.

If I knew earlier that you are so clever, I could have saved the money and ask you how to do it. Maybe I should ask
Cher Threinen-Pendarvis, Jeremy Sutton and those people why they do not simply use Photoshop but waste their time on Corel Painter’s X’s Quick-Clone, which is in fact, for newbies.

Dave Du Plessis
J
Joel
Jan 15, 2008
Dave wrote:

<snip>
If only for one moment in doubt, ask me and I will post a photo of the books in my library. I also buy monthly magazines on PS and Painter.
If I knew earlier that you are so clever, I could have saved the money and ask you how to do it. Maybe I should ask
Cher Threinen-Pendarvis, Jeremy Sutton and those people why they do not simply use Photoshop but waste their time on Corel Painter’s X’s Quick-Clone, which is in fact, for newbies.

Dave Du Plessis

I don’t deny many of them are very good, some of them are experts on some way, but because of the limitation of word I often don’t suggest any book (for fun is ok but not for learning). Video Tutorial is better than book, but it too has some limitation, and depending on what you want to learn and what the tutorial is teaching.

I have looked at few Video Tutorial clips to find that very few are good to spend time watching, and money to learn some real technique. This is what I am looking at.

– Book, most book usually show some dirty quick tricks the authors learn from some forums. They may require some understanding of how Photoshop works, little practice to gather some thing to write about. Or it doesn’t require much Photoshop skill.

IOW, knowledge but not real skill

– Video Tutorial, many of them using low-rez image to teach some dirty quick reparing technique. Yes, I do agree they look good, and very helpful to most newbie to learn newer command. And quite often I suggest newbie to learn from video tutorial, and they usually help to get to know Photoshop.

But the real deal should be video tutorial of Headshot Portrait Retouching those worl on very small detail, zoom in 100-300% to work on even smaller area, and to work with real skin-texture, human skintone etc.. not fashion, magazine type etc.. this often teach you the real retouching technique and good for large print etc..

– Do you want to test your retouching work (especially masking)?

Since the printing price is so cheap these days (used to be $3-4 per 4×6" print now you can get for around 13-20 cents a pop) and the INK doesn’t know nor want to lie (human like our friends or ourselves <bg>) so I would suggest to make a 4×6" and 8×10" print to find out the true about our work.

Or *if* you can spot little error on 4×6" print then you know for sure it will be a much bigger error on 8×10 print, and if you can spot little error on 8×10" print then you know it would be a much larger on 20×30" print etc.. and by spending few bucks on the larger error we will learn to pay much closer attention to much smaller part. Too me it’s a very cheap lesson.

– And if you work on small detail work, you may learn how ugly human may be <bg>, you may be able to see the different skin-texture between age’s, race’s, sex’s, and few others. And if you work on small detail work you may find many people turn human skin-texture into plastic look, then some plug-in company uses some dirty trick to replace real human skin-texture with digital skin-texture (after the real skin-texture been destroyed by the soften/blur option). Or you should be able to tell the difference between real and faked human skin-texture.
D
Dave
Jan 15, 2008
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:35:26 -0600, Joel wrote:

Dave wrote:

<snip>
If only for one moment in doubt, ask me and I will post a photo of the books in my library. I also buy monthly magazines on PS and Painter.
If I knew earlier that you are so clever, I could have saved the money and ask you how to do it. Maybe I should ask
Cher Threinen-Pendarvis, Jeremy Sutton and those people why they do not simply use Photoshop but waste their time on Corel Painter’s X’s Quick-Clone, which is in fact, for newbies.

Dave Du Plessis

I don’t deny many of them are very good, some of them are experts on some way, but because of the limitation of word I often don’t suggest any book (for fun is ok but not for learning). Video Tutorial is better than book, but it too has some limitation, and depending on what you want to learn and what the tutorial is teaching.

I have looked at few Video Tutorial clips to find that very few are good to spend time watching, and money to learn some real technique. This is what I am looking at.

– Book, most book usually show some dirty quick tricks the authors learn from some forums. They may require some understanding of how Photoshop works, little practice to gather some thing to write about. Or it doesn’t require much Photoshop skill.

IOW, knowledge but not real skill

– Video Tutorial, many of them using low-rez image to teach some dirty quick reparing technique. Yes, I do agree they look good, and very helpful to most newbie to learn newer command. And quite often I suggest newbie to learn from video tutorial, and they usually help to get to know Photoshop.
But the real deal should be video tutorial of Headshot Portrait Retouching those worl on very small detail, zoom in 100-300% to work on even smaller area, and to work with real skin-texture, human skintone etc.. not fashion, magazine type etc.. this often teach you the real retouching technique and good for large print etc..

– Do you want to test your retouching work (especially masking)?
Since the printing price is so cheap these days (used to be $3-4 per 4×6" print now you can get for around 13-20 cents a pop) and the INK doesn’t know nor want to lie (human like our friends or ourselves <bg>) so I would suggest to make a 4×6" and 8×10" print to find out the true about our work.
Or *if* you can spot little error on 4×6" print then you know for sure it will be a much bigger error on 8×10 print, and if you can spot little error on 8×10" print then you know it would be a much larger on 20×30" print etc.. and by spending few bucks on the larger error we will learn to pay much closer attention to much smaller part. Too me it’s a very cheap lesson.

This I done in Painter with some finishing touches in Photoshop and had it printed at A1 size (841 x 594 mm or 33.11 x 23.39 inches) http://images2.fotopic.net/?iid=ymtly2&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1

This was also printed in A1 size
http://images1.fotopic.net/?iid=ym62mq&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1

This came out lovely in A2 size (594 x 420 mm or 23.39 x 16.54 inches) http://images1.fotopic.net/?iid=ym6y95&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1

I took this photo
http://images3.fotopic.net/?iid=yluoef&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 and changed it into this
http://images4.fotopic.net/?iid=yluoe5&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1 and printed it in A2 and gave it to her framed as a gift. Only later my wife pointed out to me, I forgot the earring on the left ear:-)

Nearly all my large prints get printed on canvas
http://images3.fotopic.net/?iid=yp1w21&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1

This was done with a brush I made for the Corel Painter community http://images3.fotopic.net/?iid=yp0grn&outx=600&nore size=1&nostamp=1

and like you said, I find the cheap tests on Jumbo photos valuable.

I only post this links because you said:
– Do you want to test your retouching work (especially masking)?

I can not compare my work to those of Mike Russell, KatWoman, Peter (+60 years experience) tacit, fat Sam and many more, but I am satisfied with the results, and so is the gallery:-)

Dave
P
Peter
Jan 18, 2008
"Dave" wrote in message

I can not compare my work to those of Mike Russell, KatWoman, Peter (+60 years experience) tacit, fat Sam and many more, but I am satisfied with the results, and so is the gallery:-)

Dave, I feel compelled to reply. Although I have over 60 years photo experience, it has been as a hobby. My work is not even in the same league as those who you mention. And I include your own work in that category.


Peter
P
Peter
Jan 18, 2008
"Peter" wrote in message
"Dave" wrote in message

I can not compare my work to those of Mike Russell, KatWoman, Peter (+60 years experience) tacit, fat Sam and many more, but I am satisfied with the results, and so is the gallery:-)

Dave, I feel compelled to reply. Although I have over 60 years photo experience, it has been as a hobby. My work is not even in the same league as those who you mention. And I include your own work in that category.

Peter

To clarify, I meant to say your work has the same quality as Mike Russell’s and the others you mention. I did not mean to say it wasn’t as good.


Peter
D
Dave
Jan 18, 2008
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:04:11 -0500, "Peter"
wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

I can not compare my work to those of Mike Russell, KatWoman, Peter (+60 years experience) tacit, fat Sam and many more, but I am satisfied with the results, and so is the gallery:-)

Dave, I feel compelled to reply. Although I have over 60 years photo experience, it has been as a hobby. My work is not even in the same league as those who you mention. And I include your own work in that category.

Many thanks Peter, for a very undeserved compliment.
You are a gentleman:-)
Although I make a few Rand out of it, it is a ‘very satisfactory hobby to me as well:-)
If ònly the posers… this is some of yesterdays photos….. Let me share this with you; yesterday, while having a barbeque at our favorite escape garden, I surprised somebody peeping through my car’s window. Anyway, he was nothing bothered being detected, but simply made himself at home. Prove is here:

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47878453.html

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47878452.html

sometimes Mom says "hi… there’s the camera. Smile..!" http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47879427.html

and sometimes the children simply peep at us
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47879426.html

and then, on the swings in the play parks…
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47889894.html
P
Peter
Jan 18, 2008
"Dave" wrote in message

Many thanks Peter, for a very undeserved compliment.
You are a gentleman:-)

It’s obvious that you don’t know me.

Although I make a few Rand out of it, it is a ‘very satisfactory hobby to me as well:-)

The latter is more important to me. Just like my photos, they must please me first, then others.
(WARNING: possible controversy about to start)
If I were to make pictures I don’t like, just to sell them, to me that is nothing more than a variety of prostitution.

If ònly the posers… this is some of yesterdays photos….. Let me share this with you; yesterday, while having a barbeque at our favorite escape garden, I surprised somebody peeping through my car’s window. Anyway, he was nothing bothered being detected, but simply made himself at home. Prove is here:

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47878453.html

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47878452.html

sometimes Mom says "hi… there’s the camera. Smile..!" http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47879427.html

and sometimes the children simply peep at us
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47879426.html

and then, on the swings in the play parks…
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p47889894.html

We only see those guys in zoos. 🙁


Peter
J
Joel
Jan 20, 2008
Dave wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:04:11 -0500, "Peter"
wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

I can not compare my work to those of Mike Russell, KatWoman, Peter (+60 years experience) tacit, fat Sam and many more, but I am satisfied with the results, and so is the gallery:-)

Dave, I feel compelled to reply. Although I have over 60 years photo experience, it has been as a hobby. My work is not even in the same league as those who you mention. And I include your own work in that category.

Many thanks Peter, for a very undeserved compliment.
You are a gentleman:-)
Although I make a few Rand out of it, it is a ‘very satisfactory hobby to me as well:-)
If ònly the posers… this is some of yesterdays photos….. Let me share this with you; yesterday, while having a barbeque at our favorite escape garden, I surprised somebody peeping through my car’s window. Anyway, he was nothing bothered being detected, but simply made himself at home. Prove is here:

If you won’t mind. I usually like human more than anything else <bg> because human has some unique look that we can’t fake. And I am looking at the first 2 images of beautiful young lady (you get a beautiful model there), but either because of your camera, compression, overprocessed or whatever reason but I see some color bleeding, arifact (squares) .. argggg I didn’t know there is option to view Full Size and that’s what I want to see.. so just wait..

Nope! same size… anyway, just look at the EDGES and you will see bleeding color .. like the arm you see green and pink, around the neck and chin etc. you see some pink (and the cheeks too).

This is what I would recommend (you can tell your wife that it’s my idea <bg>) to get a DSLR camera with good lens to capture the greatest famany memory to pass to the next generation … and you may enjoy post processing even more. Or I am think what a waste <bg> to have a beautiful model but poor IQ <bg>

I know that P&S often give good color, require less post processing than DSLR, but when you go for detail work then P&S is your enermy because it’s very limited.

P.S. I hope you won’t mind me saying those negative things <bg>

Powered by Creative Market

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections