I wish I could take pictures like this!!

[doug748]

It is magnificent - so much so, it does deserve to be posted directly here, rather than hiding behind a link.

View attachment 115558

Those sort of snaps always remind me of the Magritte Empire of Light series. Now and again you do see that effect in nature under very black cloud.

 

[johnalison]

I like that A LOT! Obviously manipulated but the final product is reminiscent of vintage magazine artwork probably of the era of the car. Perfect! Why be slavishly realistic when you could have something evocative and dramatic on the wall

In spite of having printed out photos in B&W or colour up to 20x16” for half a century, I have little desire to see them on the wall. I do have a couple of prints, one on the landing and another above the computer, but generally I find their literalness unappealing, especially in the main rooms, where I have an assortment of paintings, prints and some tiles, with just a few small family shots in small frames on the furniture.

 

[Caraway]

In spite of having printed out photos in B&W or colour up to 20x16” for half a century, I have little desire to see them on the wall. I do have a couple of prints, one on the landing and another above the computer, but generally I find their literalness unappealing, especially in the main rooms, where I have an assortment of paintings, prints and some tiles, with just a few small family shots in small frames on the furniture.

That is a good point. In my office room I have a technically correct and impactful pic of an amplifier, but in the lounge have pics of cats, a misty B/W autumnal scene over pasture and a heavy-toned horizon shot with trees and clouds, also in B/W.
In the bedroom I've a pic of a (long-gone) boat on a mooring during a storm. Each could be paintings rather than photographs.

 

[claymore]

The point is that you probably have taken a picture like that. It really is very heavily manipulated so I bet you could go through your old photos, find one reasonably dramatic, run it through Lightroom and it would be like that. She would have shot in RAW which allows a lot more manipulation as well but even with an old JPG it can be done.

I think the give away is the blue in the sky behind the clouds, when the sky is still that pale it wouldn't be that dark under the clouds. She brought down the shadows like crazy and vignetted. Its really quite easy, the hard bit is knowing when to stop.

You are very kind - too kind really for your own good. The fact is - I'm really very bad with a camera!
I went on a work sponsored 2 day course to learn about photoshop - this was a long time ago.
The lady running the course was brilliant - she showed us all about layers and shades and turned very ordinary images into masterpieces. The moment of truth arrived with the words 'you try - you can't break it so have a go.'
A day and a half later I'd managed to draw a moustache on the Mona Lisa. (It didn't really do much for Lisa)
What I worked out is that to do image alterations or whatever we call them - you first need a vision of what it is you wish to create. I'm fairly ok at writing because I tend to know (most of the time) what I'm trying to say. That doesn't mean I consider myself to be an author - but when it comes to pictures - I really have no idea of what would be ok and what wouldn't. If you need further evidence to support this claim, I could post any number of black ants on white backgrounds. They live in the 'Ski Holidays' file.

 

[johnalison]

You are very kind - too kind really for your own good. The fact is - I'm really very bad with a camera!
I went on a work sponsored 2 day course to learn about photoshop - this was a long time ago.
The lady running the course was brilliant - she showed us all about layers and shades and turned very ordinary images into masterpieces. The moment of truth arrived with the words 'you try - you can't break it so have a go.'
A day and a half later I'd managed to draw a moustache on the Mona Lisa. (It didn't really do much for Lisa)
What I worked out is that to do image alterations or whatever we call them - you first need a vision of what it is you wish to create. I'm fairly ok at writing because I tend to know (most of the time) what I'm trying to say. That doesn't mean I consider myself to be an author - but when it comes to pictures - I really have no idea of what would be ok and what wouldn't. If you need further evidence to support this claim, I could post any number of black ants on white backgrounds. They live in the 'Ski Holidays' file.

You are right about needing to have an image of what you want the photo to look like. I think that I have learned to do this to some extent, but it is often clear that others haven't. There is a world of difference between a beautiful photo of a scene and a photo of a beautiful scene. Many beginners think that their photo of, say, a Scottish mountain or Willy Lott's cottage must be a winner, when the result is a poorly-composed picture that has exposure problems and with faulty colours. There is no substitute for getting on with the job and seeing what others think of it.

 

[Adios]

You are very kind - too kind really for your own good. The fact is - I'm really very bad with a camera!
I went on a work sponsored 2 day course to learn about photoshop - this was a long time ago.
The lady running the course was brilliant - she showed us all about layers and shades and turned very ordinary images into masterpieces. The moment of truth arrived with the words 'you try - you can't break it so have a go.'
A day and a half later I'd managed to draw a moustache on the Mona Lisa. (It didn't really do much for Lisa)
What I worked out is that to do image alterations or whatever we call them - you first need a vision of what it is you wish to create. I'm fairly ok at writing because I tend to know (most of the time) what I'm trying to say. That doesn't mean I consider myself to be an author - but when it comes to pictures - I really have no idea of what would be ok and what wouldn't. If you need further evidence to support this claim, I could post any number of black ants on white backgrounds. They live in the 'Ski Holidays' file.

The bulk of alterations aren't done in Photoshop with layers etc, thats much more complicated and more for specific changes, in fact considering the weird glow on the shroud is still there it appears the first photo in question wasn't touched up in photoshop. If you download a trial version of Corel Aftershot AfterShot Pro 3 | Get Your Free Trial open up any photo and move the sliders that are on the right side of the screen you'll see how its done. You don't need a prior vision, just move them about until it looks nice. Its worth a go.

 

[Adios]

In spite of having printed out photos in B&W or colour up to 20x16” for half a century, I have little desire to see them on the wall. I do have a couple of prints, one on the landing and another above the computer, but generally I find their literalness unappealing, especially in the main rooms, where I have an assortment of paintings, prints and some tiles, with just a few small family shots in small frames on the furniture.

True, standard photos out of the camera are rarely punchy enough for the wall. As someone already said alterations in software isn't new, dodging and burning etc was done with photo development from negs as well for good reason. We all know that photos are never as good as being there, so modifying them to give them more contrast or colour isn't cheating, its actually trying to be more realistic in the sense of giving as great an impact as the scene gave in reality, but perhaps letting go of trying to stick to a a literal visual depiction of the moment is required to get something that conveys the true impact of the scene. Rather than the almost 180 degrees view our eyes saw we only have a narrow area of it in the photo so of course we need to have more in that area to come close to replicating the impact.