Ding Ding

[arith]

And I wasn't drunk either. After a massive public bus trip with four connections I end up here broke because the final mile cost more than all the rest, well nearly, and it started to pour it down. Great, I find out it is hard to take pictures in the rain even when it is only spitting. I used a GG2 on the first but it got wet to easy, on the second it was not raining and on the third I could not find a spot for a good photo without someone in it I suppose the posts really are leaning, I wasn't drunk.

[Geoff F]

The sloping pavement may be giving a false impression of level; but yes, every vertical appears to be at a different angle, including the pub wall.

[arith]

Yes and looking at the pub wall, in the top,.. looks like more red bricks at the top than the bottom of it. Apart from the furniture this is a good spot, not.

The thing is I think I need to be level with the middle height of a tram, to get the most interesting shot. This isn't it just the only place without people; actually somebody is next to me.

[arith]

And this is my favourite; not my main interest but there isn't any dosh in that. If I get this right, loads 'o' money, as Duffy said anybody who calls photography art, is lying. It isn't.

[arith]

Hey it doesn't work; you gotta see his face properly before it works, and you can't can you.

[ScoutR]

And this is my favourite; not my main interest but there isn't any dosh in that. If I get this right, loads 'o' money, as Duffy said anybody who calls photography art, is lying. It isn't.

"It is art if you say it is" - also said cynically by Duffy. I take it you watched the clip posted by Rob. The man who shot the 60s

What an interesting guy, and the clip was great. Inspiring but a little sad at the same time.

Back to Ding Ding. The last one is my favourite too and the first one

Wendy

[Shadowman]

Another look.

[arith]

Cheers Wendy and John. Yes I looked ar Sepia but thought it was too predictable however, I would like to know how to do the Orton method, anyway that is what I think it is called; where you overexpose two stops an image and one overexposed by ?? and out of focus. This might be dramatic.

[ScoutR]

Cheers Wendy and John. Yes I looked ar Sepia but thought it was too predictable however, I would like to know how to do the Orton method, anyway that is what I think it is called; where you overexpose two stops an image and one overexposed by ?? and out of focus. This might be dramatic.

Arith: This is what I came up with using the Orton instructions for Elements here http://photography.about.com/od/deve...neffect_10.htm

I like the original better, but you can fool around with the blur and brightness. For this I used 16% gaussian blur and 150 brighness and the opacity of the background layer was set to 65%

I think rob has posted some instructions for Orton too



Wendy

[arith]

Cheers Wendy; with a bit of fiddling I know a pic that will be good for. That is really good.

[ScoutR]

Here is another example with different settings. Backgroundlayer2 opacity 60%: Gausian Blur 30%: Brightnesslayer Brightness = 100. I think I like this better, but still prefer your original.

Hope you don't mind me doing this. I'll quit now

[Shadowman]

Here is another example with different settings. Backgroundlayer2 opacity 60%: Gausian Blur 30%: Brightnesslayer Brightness = 100. I think I like this better, but still prefer your original.

Hope you don't mind me doing this. I'll quit now

Wendy and Arith,

The subject matter is timeless (classical machinery) so you have some leeway in how you choose to present the image. What would set your image apart from an antique photograph would be the quality of the image, an older photograph would have scratches, tears, etc. As I said in an earlier post, black and white or sepia photographs are timeless except for the contents that date the image, for instance a woman in designer jeans or a gentleman with a mullet. Removing color has a way of enhancing a typical image, the fact that an antique is included only adds to the illusion.

[arith]

Of course I don't mind Wendy.

[arith]

Waiting and waiting and waiting, my whole life is spent waiting.



I don't understand those instructions Wendy, why two more layer and discard the base.

[ScoutR]

I don't know why discard the base, but the two layers are 1 for the gaussian blur and one for brightness. I guess the extra duplicate is in case you mess up you still have your original. You can get various effects depending on the amount and combination of blur and brightness applied. If I understand correctly the real Orton Process involves taking duplicate shots one blurred and one overexposed and then putting them together. That sounds more like something you might like to try.

here are a couple more links. I used the first one becaue to me it seemed easiest. That was last year though and I could barely open Elements let along get anything to work in it. The ones below might be better, I don't know, I'll have to try them again.

http://www.naturephotographers.net/a.../kn0406-1.html this one has a link to the one below. they are both from the same site
http://www.naturephotographers.net/a.../dw0106-1.html

Wendy


Edit: I think you discard the original layer because you don't want to multiply that layer with the blurred and bright one. It would probably change the effect. I don't have time to experiment, but it makes sense.

[arith]

Cheers Wendy, I had another go cos I was stupid and actually compensated for distortion on 50mm as if it was 17mm and I don't know who the boy is so I've been trying to blur him. They are a nuisance and there are millions of them, I suppose it is their sort of museum I certainly soon got bored with riding trams but you have to here in order to get around, they don't allow pedestrians to walk up the track.

I've been doing both brightness and blur on the same layer.

[arith]

Is this the Orton method; I did seperate things on seperate layers and it looks the same. The washed out look is done with a different application that can differentiate between bright and dull colours. I use it mainly for perspective, cloning and cropping but choosing a paper size actually makes the file bigger, even after heavy cropping.

[ScoutR]

Cheers Wendy, I had another go cos I was stupid and actually compensated for distortion on 50mm as if it was 17mm and I don't know who the boy is so I've been trying to blur him. They are a nuisance and there are millions of them, I suppose it is their sort of museum I certainly soon got bored with riding trams but you have to here in order to get around, they don't allow pedestrians to walk up the track.

I've been doing both brightness and blur on the same layer.

Arith: Your original of this is MUCH better. I think you should try the same method on this as you used in the shot below (post #17) I don't know what you did, but it looks good. If you want a pseudo Orton effect then just follow the instructions in that first link, and then play with different settings until you know how each one affects the final image. I only had time to try a couple last night but different amounts of each one and/or different combinations will give you a much different look, as will the opacity setting of the blur layer.

Wendy

[arith]

Cheers Wendy; the method has potential, especially with places like this with so many people are around it is useful to blur them a bit.

[rpcrowe]

I especially like the first image with the comparison between the older trolly with the newer (but still old) version.

My grandfather drove a trolly in San Antonio, Texas when they transitioned from horsedrawn to electric models.

BTW: OPTECH sells plastic rainsleeves which are great for protecting any camera. They are not at all expensive and are quite light to carry "just in case"... However for smaller cameras a plastic baggie (especially a freeaer bag) does a great job protecting the camera...