Sillyettes

[F.Gordon]

Poll question: Sillyettes

Did a quick scan of my snap crap and could only found this one....

Mountain Townscape



Remembered a snap I took months ago and decided to go back and re-snap it today in hopes of getting a "new" silhouette. Didn't come out they way I wanted. :(

Dude



Thanks for lookin'. Thanks for votin'. Comments, Critique, and Holiday Appetizer recipes are appreciated.
:hi:

Oh, and if you can recommend a good Box O' Wine that goes with Turkey....

[intheflow]

1. I love the sky in the first one.

But the composition and silouette subject are far better in the second. imho. :hi:

[F.Gordon]

2. Thanks

No suggestions on a good Box O' Wine?
:shrug:

Do you think the frame thing would be considered "extreme processing"? If so, I can get rid of it.

[intheflow]

4. I never even noticed the frame.

And no, I don't think it's extreme processing. To me, photos don't get into the realm of "extreme" until they start looking like this:

[F.Gordon]

5. Looks fairly normal to me

:smoke:

[xiamiam]

3. i like both of these shots but i picked the sky and building...dramatic..nice shots..nt

[F.Gordon]

6. Ms F' liked that one too

A compliment from Ms F' usually goes something like... "YOU took that??"
:eyes:

Thanks
:hi:

[xiamiam]

7. funny...at least you're still surprising her..nt

[RagingInMiami]

8. I love the sky in the first photo, but the sillyette doesn't do shit for me

I think if you reduce the highlights (shine) in the second photo, it might make it look more human-like.

Ideally, I would like to see the statue with a backdrop of the sky above, but that is why they call it photography and not painting.

It reminds of a photo I took of a statue on a mountaintop church in Bogota, Colombia a couple of years ago.

[F.Gordon]

10. Getting rid of the blown out bits is easy enough

Like I said... didn't turn out the way I wanted. Could have hired a tourist to hold a diffuser up for me since I don't have a lighting crew that follows me everywhere.
:rofl:

Still have one more day.... will see what I can come up with. :P

Edit? Word in brain... but word didn't get typed....

[RagingInMiami]

11. But if you're shooting sillyettes

You don't need a flash or a diffuser or a lighting crew for that matter

[F.Gordon]

12. I didn't have time to "wait for the light"

Could have setup a flash behind the statue and a diffuser to remove the blown out bits.... or... I could have waited about an hour or so for the light to be just right.... and this "place" was a little too congested for me. I was doing pinhole and infrared too and enjoyed replying to the questions of "what was I doing" only for the first 20 times.
:silly:

[JeffR]

9. Chose Dude, Dude

and I like the funky frame, too.

[ConsAreLiars]

13. Just playing with "dude" (seems like he'd be ok with that)

First, using PWP, used the Gray/Levels and Color Transformation to set the Saturation to 0 and kick up the midtones to 70-80%. This brought out the detail in the background, and turned it into a B&W. The used Filter - CC20R at around 35%, to warm it up a bit. (edit to add, I might have done that before adding the border, or used a mask to exclude it from these operations, if I had the original, or wanted to be a bit more faithful to your work, but I don't really mind it this way.)

[F.Gordon]

14. "Dude" is pretty layed back

I couldn't decide if the background should blend in with the Dude or sit off on its own. You can see that I decided that Dude should blend in. I like what you did.... will run Dude through the Rawomatic 3000 and see how it looks with the background standing out more..... and I'll give a B&W a try.

I thank you. Dude thanks you.

[ConsAreLiars]

15. It seems a bit easier to mess around with other's photos than my own.

Like when playing with one like "Dude" I can stop when I find something "interesting." But with my own I want to reach "good" or at least "good enough" and never can decide if I have reached that criteria.

[F.Gordon]

16. Stop over. I have a ton of stuff you can mess with

When I'm doing a bag-o-pixies I'll usually come up with a "batch messin'" recipe and stick with it. On a single pic I rarely acheive anything that I like and usually settle for "fair". "Good" seems to be that last bit of stairs I can never climb.

One of the things I did today was re-snap a pic that I've worked on and have never been happy with it. I nailed the re-snap today. Now I have to see if I can rework it to get what I've been seeing in my mind.

Read about this French photog that would spend a solid week with little or no sleep working... "developing" just one photo in his darkroom. This local gal I know spent 1 1/2 years working on a 10 pic gallery presentation. The results were beyond description. It's difficult in this fast paced digital age (she is a filmsie) to slow down. "Dude" was a drive-by fodochop. Like you.... I just went with the first thing that looked "interesting" and stayed with it.

Maybe "Dude" and myself need to have a little sit down. Get to know each other.

[ConsAreLiars]

17. Ansel Adams went back to the same site over and over,

and reworked the same negative time and time again, always striving to get a bit more of the truth of what he saw into the print. I did the B&W version and then, since B&W always means Ansel Adams, and THAT was a playfield I don't want to even pretend to walk past, decided to sepia-tone it. That said, doing what we can, and sharing it, is the way we learn to appreciate what we see, and learn to see what we might otherwise miss.

[TahitiNut]

18. White Zinfandel

:hi: