Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 22 May 2011 (Sunday) 13:50
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What is this PP style called?

 
erinavery
Senior Member
Avatar
452 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
May 30, 2011 20:12 |  #46

cameraperson wrote in post #12506142 (external link)
I didn't knock all of them. I posted in the OP because that was an example of a good one. I've seen tons that were horrible and though I'm not in love with the style, not even in the first one, I can recognize that the first one was well done and would be something worth emulating.

yes i know that you're not really knocking it...some others were a bit..you were just curious what the style was referred as..the whole tone of the thread was just bugging me for some reason...maybe because i really like well done creative edits...in any case i apologize.

did you feel your question was answered tho? it would be referred to as a cross processing i believe.


FACEBOOK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
cptrios
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Boston, USA / Burgundy, France
     
May 30, 2011 20:15 |  #47

erinavery wrote in post #12506016 (external link)
and everyone does straight color or b&w or sepia...i really don't understand why a bunch a of "creative types" are sitting around knocking someone elses creative expression...the sample posted was really well done. i could see if it was a critique on skill level...out of focus or poorly composed but calling it an overdone fad i just don't understand.

I don't think anyone said anything about the posted sample! In fact I rather like them, particularly the third shot of the girl on the bike, where the effect is present but very subtle.

The problem (for me at least) is not with the people using the effect as part of their "creative expression," but with the thousands out there who who take awful pictures and pass them off as "creative expression" by slapping a preset (that somebody else made) onto them. See: the ridiculous popularity of Hipstamatic and Instagram. A stupid shot of your friend drinking a PBR becomes "artistic" once it's been cross-processed. And because of this, people will look at the poor guy who took those samples in the OP, who was merely trying to get the most out of pictures of his(?) kids, and say "he's trying to be like all those hipsters with their iPhone Lomo apps."

But all of this is just part of the same kind of endless cycle that infects any kind of artistic pursuit. Five years ago there were a few people doing this, and it was quite interesting. Now, there are tens of millions of young people out there who literally won't think a photo is "cool" unless it's been cross-processed. It's even a pre-set image mode on many new P&S cameras (and the X100). Therefore, all of the "creative types" start getting frustrated by its ubiquity and complain about it until the next fad comes around.

The real shame is that I do see the value in making art from a crappy photo...but not as a way of covering up its crappiness. So I don't hate cross-processing (in fact I really like many iterations of the effect) but I have very mixed feelings whenever I see it. And I frequently do a bit of it myself!

Also, this classic:

IMAGE: http://i.imgur.com/pfnqn.jpg

Fuji X100 / Sony NEX-7 / Contax G 45mm f/2 / The ghosts of 3 Canon bodies past / A meagre amount of talent
My weak lil' 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cameraperson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
816 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA.
     
May 30, 2011 22:08 |  #48

erinavery wrote in post #12506203 (external link)
yes i know that you're not really knocking it...some others were a bit..you were just curious what the style was referred as..the whole tone of the thread was just bugging me for some reason...maybe because i really like well done creative edits...in any case i apologize.

did you feel your question was answered tho? it would be referred to as a cross processing i believe.

Yes. Thank you. I was not offended by your comments though.


Xsi, 18-55

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CosmicSpock
Member
51 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
     
May 31, 2011 11:40 |  #49

megapixelsoffun wrote in post #12506194 (external link)
I think the problem here is that those doing the most complaining are the least artistic types maybe

Truf ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cameraperson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
816 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA.
     
May 31, 2011 13:44 |  #50

CosmicSpock wrote in post #12509600 (external link)
Truf ;)

Would you say that about any art critique?


Xsi, 18-55

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DAMphyne
"the more I post, the less accurate..."
Avatar
2,156 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 33
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Northern Indiana, USA
     
Jun 01, 2011 07:15 |  #51

Most of this type of image reminds me of prints that didn't get enough time in the stop-bath, then got thrown into a box for 20 years.
Or hung on a wall and left to fade.
Years later, somebody thinks it looks cool and wonders what kind of processing was used to create the "look".
Bad processing and poor storage.


David
Digital set me free
"Welcome Seeker! Now, don't feel alone here in the New Age, because there's a seeker born every minute.";)
www.damphyne.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonGrl01
Goldmember
Avatar
1,369 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2011
     
Jun 01, 2011 19:57 |  #52

I think it's pretty. Romantic. Dreamy.

All subjective of course.


5Dii | 35L | 85 1.8 | 135L | 430EXII
T2i | 50 1.8 | 18-55 | 55-250

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
megapixelsoffun
Member
Avatar
202 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jun 01, 2011 20:37 |  #53

DAMphyne wrote in post #12514818 (external link)
Most of this type of image reminds me of prints that didn't get enough time in the stop-bath, then got thrown into a box for 20 years.
Or hung on a wall and left to fade.
Years later, somebody thinks it looks cool and wonders what kind of processing was used to create the "look".
Bad processing and poor storage.

Your attitude is unsurprising by the stuff you have on your website (btw most people hate sites with music on them), all of your photos look like they have had zero post production to them of any kind, no color enhancement ot other artistic manipulation.

This is not a troll of you or a dig at your skills, just an observation.


Canon EOS 7D | Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG APO HSM (Bigma) | Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (Thrifty Fifty) | Canon 100 mm F/2.8 L MACRO IS USM | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM | 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
erinavery
Senior Member
Avatar
452 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jun 01, 2011 21:12 |  #54

megapixelsoffun wrote in post #12519043 (external link)
Your attitude is unsurprising by the stuff you have on your website (btw most people hate sites with music on them), all of your photos look like they have had zero post production to them of any kind, no color enhancement ot other artistic manipulation.

This is not a troll of you or a dig at your skills, just an observation.

that is pretty much what i expected too...some people just have a strong dislike for anything different or out of the ordinary looking....like complaining about unusual angles or chopping the top of the head off in a close up...it's frustrating but i guess there's enough different kind of clients and photographers out there not to worry too much about it.


FACEBOOK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cptrios
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Boston, USA / Burgundy, France
     
Jun 01, 2011 22:37 |  #55

Haha well, it's one thing to be reluctant to use the same effect everyone else is using (cross-processing) and refusing to do any PP at all. But note that DAMphyne didn't attack anyone; it's not even certain that he was criticizing the effect, rather than simply describing the traditional film "technique" that would have led to a similar thing. So quit ragging on him!


Fuji X100 / Sony NEX-7 / Contax G 45mm f/2 / The ghosts of 3 Canon bodies past / A meagre amount of talent
My weak lil' 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
erinavery
Senior Member
Avatar
452 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jun 01, 2011 23:35 |  #56

oh damn...i didn't mean to rag on him. i just meant that i expected that a lot of people who don't like it probably don't like much pp on their images.


FACEBOOK (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DAMphyne
"the more I post, the less accurate..."
Avatar
2,156 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 33
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Northern Indiana, USA
     
Jun 02, 2011 05:32 |  #57

megapixelsoffun wrote in post #12519043 (external link)
Your attitude is unsurprising by the stuff you have on your website (btw most people hate sites with music on them), all of your photos look like they have had zero post production to them of any kind, no color enhancement ot other artistic manipulation.

This is not a troll of you or a dig at your skills, just an observation.

I did lots of "post-processing" in the 60's & 70's. Gave it up when I sold my darkroom.
Thanks for checking out my site, I agree, most of my stuff is right out of camera.
As for the music..., no excuses :)


David
Digital set me free
"Welcome Seeker! Now, don't feel alone here in the New Age, because there's a seeker born every minute.";)
www.damphyne.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Spacemunkie
Goldmember
Avatar
1,547 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 151
Joined Apr 2008
     
Jun 02, 2011 05:39 |  #58

cptrios wrote in post #12505866 (external link)
I think that the big complaint here is that these days it does all kind of look the same, given that everyone and their mother...

...has a DSLR and is taking photographs.

Fixed that for you :D


Scott/Spacemunkie:My photos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cptrios
Goldmember
Avatar
1,744 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Boston, USA / Burgundy, France
     
Jun 02, 2011 11:57 |  #59

erinavery wrote in post #12520182 (external link)
oh damn...i didn't mean to rag on him. i just meant that i expected that a lot of people who don't like it probably don't like much pp on their images.

I have never seen such horrible ragging! I hope you're ashamed of yourself!

Personally it's not that I don't like it so much as that I'm tired of it. I actually do a ton of PP myself, and admittedly a lot of it is on the same level as cross-processing in terms of making something out of very little. For example, I do a lot of faux-color-filter B&W conversion, and though all that really does is make up for the fact that you can't put B&W film in a DSLR, it is only possible through a piece of software of someone else's design (the fantastically awesome Silver Efex Pro, which among other things does the very best film grain simulation out there). So it's not like I work completely from scratch either.

Could it be that I just hate Hipstamatic with a passion?

Spacemunkie wrote in post #12521130 (external link)
...has a DSLR and is taking photographs.

Fixed that for you :D

Funnily enough, my mother does have a DSLR :lol:.


Fuji X100 / Sony NEX-7 / Contax G 45mm f/2 / The ghosts of 3 Canon bodies past / A meagre amount of talent
My weak lil' 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,226 views & 0 likes for this thread
What is this PP style called?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kbcl0ttery
841 guests, 235 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.