Photo To Painting

babblebiz wrote:

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.

Well, with the history brush and some basic painting skill then no highly skilled artistry will be needed <bg>

"babblebiz" wrote in message

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.
Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

They would have even more difficulty distinguishing between a real photo and one which had no painting done on it.

They would also have difficulty distinguishing between you and a real idiot.

Roy G

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:43:57 -0700 (PDT), babblebiz
wrote:

Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

This is so stupid. A painting should have less detail.
If many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting, why not simply make am enlargement of the photo on canvas?

A Photo should look like a photo and a painting should look like a painting. Most probably you guys simly enlarge it and call it paintings.

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012704.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012705.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012706.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p48939368.html

"babblebiz" wrote in message

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.
Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

http://www.squidoo.com/photo-to-painting

There are effects/filters in Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc that do this, and more.
Virtual Painter does it with all sorts of options.

"Carrie" wrote:

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.
Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

There are effects/filters in Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc that do this, and more.
Virtual Painter does it with all sorts of options.

Correct. This is true. You can also bake bread at home. But what do you do? Go buy it at the cafe next door.
Remember to remind the assistant at the counter next time when buying bread so he can send you home to look after yourself.

"Dave" wrote in message

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:43:57 -0700 (PDT), babblebiz
wrote:

Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

This is so stupid. A painting should have less detail.
If many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting, why not simply make am enlargement of the photo on canvas?

A Photo should look like a photo and a painting should look like a painting. Most probably you guys simly enlarge it and call it paintings.

http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012704.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012705.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p40012706.html
http://dave.photos.gb.net/p48939368.html

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally, any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:24:42 -0400, "KatWoman"

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally, any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

The real way to do it is Corel Painter’s way, where you simply trace an outline, not even in fine detail, of the photo. on a new layer. Then paint, according to your own taste, is added and mixed in a ‘mixer pad’ (or easel) from where you paint with lots of brushes. This is real digital painting.
There are even brushes (Bristle Brushes), with dryout control that determines how quickly a brush runs out of paint.
Changing a photo into a painting is not only adding brush strokes to a photo.

Dave

"Dave" a

"Dave" wrote in message

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:24:42 -0400, "KatWoman"

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally,
any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out
of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has
a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to
control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm
that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings
made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive
style that is not like a photo at all

The real way to do it is Corel Painter’s way, where you simply trace an outline, not even in fine detail, of the photo. on a new layer. Then paint, according to your own taste, is added and mixed in a ‘mixer pad’ (or easel) from where you paint with lots of brushes. This is real digital painting.
There are even brushes (Bristle Brushes), with dryout control that determines how quickly a brush runs out of paint.
Changing a photo into a painting is not only adding brush strokes to a photo.

Dave

I don’t know about all this digital stuff.. but the last "Photo to Painting" that my Aunt did before she passed was a 6′ X 5′ of JC Penney back in the early 60s done with Oils..
She shot his Portrait… Printed on canvas… and painted it with oils.. A beautiful piece of work! Now that is what I consider "Photo to Painting"
—
"Granny"
Old N Slow N Prefer Quick N Easy

"KatWoman" wrote in message

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally, any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

Hi

I watched a local Pro Photographer doing the second type to a 20 x 16 Portrait.

The material was a clear synthetic varnish with a thick consistency. He just daubed it all over the Portrait, very roughly following the shape of the features, with a quarter inch brush, leaving the surface very uneven.

The whole process only took a couple of minutes, yet looked surprisingly realistic once dry.

Roy G

"Roy G" wrote in message

"KatWoman" wrote in message

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally, any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

Hi

I watched a local Pro Photographer doing the second type to a 20 x 16 Portrait.

The material was a clear synthetic varnish with a thick consistency. He just daubed it all over the Portrait, very roughly following the shape of the features, with a quarter inch brush, leaving the surface very uneven.
The whole process only took a couple of minutes, yet looked surprisingly realistic once dry.

Roy G

I find it a little "gimmicky"
but I think it will appeal to a certain customer

clear synthetic varnish >>>is it smelly>??

"KatWoman" wrote in message

"Roy G" wrote in message

"KatWoman" wrote in message

there are two types of photo to painting
this one seems to just add some brush stroke looks to the image digitally, any of us who own PS or Corel can make that

the other services I have seen add actual thickness and brush strokes, out of some transparent medium over the image and on a canvas surface, so it has a more 3D built up quality like a painting

the first one is not worth much to me to allow others to do, I like to control the artistry myself
‘the second I would not do for lack of workshop and time, easier to farm that out

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings made from photos

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

Hi

I watched a local Pro Photographer doing the second type to a 20 x 16 Portrait.

The material was a clear synthetic varnish with a thick consistency. He just daubed it all over the Portrait, very roughly following the shape of the features, with a quarter inch brush, leaving the surface very uneven.
The whole process only took a couple of minutes, yet looked surprisingly realistic once dry.

Roy G

I find it a little "gimmicky"
but I think it will appeal to a certain customer

clear synthetic varnish >>>is it smelly>??

Hi.

I don’t remember any strong smells, even though we were in quite a small room.

He put the print into an old fashioned looking ornate frame, and the finished result was quite impressive. But, obviously not to everyones taste.

Roy G

—– Original Message —–
From: "KatWoman"
Newsgroups: alt.graphics.photoshop
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: Photo To Painting

that said I find enlargements of actual photos much nicer than paintings

made from photos

Bingo……….

real artists worth paying to do your portrait, should have a distinctive style that is not like a photo at all

DING DING! Gosh yer smart! 🙂

"Dave" wrote in message

"Carrie" wrote:

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.
Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

There are effects/filters in Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc that do this, and more.
Virtual Painter does it with all sorts of options.

Correct. This is true. You can also bake bread at home. But what do you do? Go buy it at the cafe next door.
Remember to remind the assistant at the counter next time when buying bread so he can send you home to look after yourself.

I don’t know what this means.
Or what you mean by it.

"Jean Pierre Daviau" wrote in message

"Dave" a

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 19:20:18 -0400, "Carrie"
wrote:

I hope no one thought I meant photoshop, effects, etc replaces "for real" paintings, and using a brush, etc.
Most of the time the painting effects on the computer don’t even compare.

I had Fractal Painter 4.0 on an old Win98 computer that did some interesting photo to painting. Corel bought out the company and I believe it’s now just called Corel Painter.
One of the features that interested me about the program was that you could take a picture, and select "Van Gogh" and the software would start to paint the photo with Van Gogh style brush strokes. You’d sit back and watch each stroke being painted(very fast of course) and when it was finished, it actually looked like a Van Gogh style painting. I always wondered what it would look like printed out an one of today’s photo printers using canvas. I think it would look pretty good.<g> I don’t think it would compare to a real artist’s work of course, but for those of us who can’t paint, it would help us fill up our wall space with something other than family photos.<g>

Talker

Carrie wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message

"Carrie" wrote:

Oils paintings are used in some of the world’s most beautiful paintings and demand highly skilled artistry to create them.
Photo to painting also allows for a high level of detail. In fact, many individuals might even have a problem telling the difference between a real photograph and a photo to painting.

There are effects/filters in Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc that do this, and more.
Virtual Painter does it with all sorts of options.

Correct. This is true. You can also bake bread at home. But what do you do? Go buy it at the cafe next door.
Remember to remind the assistant at the counter next time when buying bread so he can send you home to look after yourself.

I don’t know what this means.
Or what you mean by it.

I think it means that some people may be offended by comparing the effects possible with Photoshop to the output of an actual painter working with paints and canvas. Personally, my take is that both can involve a high measure of creativity and both can produce either things of beauty or in other cases, crap. I figure that the main thrust of Photoshop is image manipulation as opposed to image creation, but the fact that some people are able to use it creatively is to their credit, IMHO.

This brings up an interesting point. I’ve been able to "create" some interesting, perhaps even artful looking images pretty much through trial and error via the filters and other features of Photoshop with which I’m familiar. However, I’m the first to admit that I’m not a creative person, being more analytical than artistic. I don’t "see" an end product and strive to create it, I take an image I like and fiddle with it in the hopes of accidentally ending up with something interesting.

So, is what I get "art", or if not, what is it? If so, does anyone want to buy a nifty, stylized print-out of my elbow?

—
dvus

Talker wrote:

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 19:20:18 -0400, "Carrie"
wrote:

I hope no one thought I meant photoshop, effects, etc replaces "for real" paintings, and using a brush, etc.
Most of the time the painting effects on the computer don’t even compare.

I had Fractal Painter 4.0 on an old Win98 computer that did some interesting photo to painting. Corel bought out the company and I believe it’s now just called Corel Painter.
One of the features that interested me about the program was that you could take a picture, and select "Van Gogh" and the software would start to paint the photo with Van Gogh style brush strokes. You’d sit back and watch each stroke being painted(very fast of course) and when it was finished, it actually looked like a Van Gogh style painting. I always wondered what it would look like printed out an one of today’s photo printers using canvas. I think it would look pretty good.<g> I don’t think it would compare to a real artist’s work of course, but for those of us who can’t paint, it would help us fill up our wall space with something other than family photos.<g>
Talker

I have Corel Painter and not impress with what it can do. The feature you mention above call QuickClone that allows you to Clone the original (from layer below) to different painting style base on the Brush’s and Setting’s. It also has the auto-mode on some brushes not all brush.

Photoshop History Brush does the similar and lot more. And if you use as regular painting then Corel Paint is more flexible than Photoshop because Photoshop is photo retoucher with some option to do some painting, but not a painter.

Also, I read many people finish the painting with Photoshop to boost up the paint a little using sme strength of Photoshop which Carel Painter itself can’t do.