Out of the Box round II

Similar style but very different image. Does it work? Open for critique. Best viewed in color managed Firefox.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I think if you made the texture layer less dense on her face and hair it may look better. I had to stare at this for a few minutes before I could figure out what this was. I think there is way too much going on here in this image but that is just my opinion. Creative idea.

I think it is a bit dark. I has a really nice effect, love the water.

Thanks for the comments. I work on a NEC PA241W and the characteristics are different than laptop or normal LCD screens. On normal LCD screens there is less dynamic range so what looks right on my screen often looks muddy on a normal screen. I am in a bit of a quandary about that. The texture and water are married to the same image. Change one change the other. Blending is a bit difficult too because the relationships between layers change and I found this blend to be the most optimal in terms of color and impact. Certainly however as I become more skilled at composites perhaps I will find the means to exert even greater control.

Doesn't do anything for me. Looks like a 10 year old who loaded up Photoshop for the first time and played around.

You are correct except I am 52 and really behind the 8-ball on things as you can tell. I should stick to shooting skate boarders and homeless people and get trained to be a real photographer. But I won't.

jetcode wrote in post #13519189
You are correct except I am 52 and really behind the 8-ball on things as you can tell. I should stick to shooting skate boarders and homeless people and get trained to be a real photographer. But I won't.

What do skateboarders and homeless people have to do with being a real photographer?

What you posted isn't really photography, it would be more like digital art or mixed media. Whatever bit of photography is there is hidden and distorted by all the Photoshop filters.

Numenorean wrote in post #13520445
What do skateboarders and homeless people have to do with being a real photographer?

What you posted isn't really photography, it would be more like digital art or mixed media. Whatever bit of photography is there is hidden and distorted by all the Photoshop filters.

Lots of people shoot literal. I do too. Here's proof in the spoof.
https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=13512100&p​ostcount=1

But this image above is not a literal but it is photography. There are no filters there are 3 composite layers from 3 images. They are blended to make a statement that can't possibly be captured under conventional photographic processes. Welcome to the new dawn of the digital darkroom. I really like the image above it is far more interesting to me than most literals.

I think maybe you might phrase your question more definitely - does it work for what - or as what? A portrait - pop art - or what?
It seems like the central image has had some colorizing with no particular purpose, and I don't get the point of the overlays except maybe to just play around with styles to get ideas. I agree with cgen1 that it's too busy. You have three different textures, a canvas, water drops, and a high-contrast face; three vertical panels competing for attention with a central subject. Overall I think it doesn't work for me as being an interesting composition. It might be interesting to see your three originals. I find it hard to imagine no photoshopping going on in this piece.

jetcode wrote in post #13520799
Lots of people shoot literal. I do too. Here's proof in the spoof.
https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=13512100&p​ostcount=1

But this image above is not a literal but it is photography. There are no filters there are 3 composite layers from 3 images. They are blended to make a statement that can't possibly be captured under conventional photographic processes. Welcome to the new dawn of the digital darkroom. I really like the image above it is far more interesting to me than most literals.

I do plenty of stuff in the digital darkroom, but to me this shot still relates more closely to digital design, mixed media, etc. than it does photography. I know you don't want a standard portrait, and that's fine, but for me this particular image doesn't do anything for me. But a lot of what people call "fine art" doesn't do much for me either.

You statement about shooting skateboarders and homeless guys made me lol. thanks lol.

I agree it is starting cross mixed media front lines and I feel like it should be critiqued as such. From what I can tell though the individual shots seem pretty nice, and I agree w/ the less texture, I think by reducing the opacity of the texture it'll make the photo of the girl and the water "pop" off the page more.

I don't think you should quite give up on it yet though. I think it could have some cool implications. Maybe a horizontal dramatic landscape? maybe even black and white? In my mind something like that looks interesting where, a photo of a beautiful young woman I just want to see more detail.

Hope this helps!

Thanks everyone I appreciate your opinion. This is a work in progress as I explore some alternate dimensions in imagery. The 3 images are hi-key textured board and water, low key portrait, and slow motion car lights at night, they are stacked and blended as smart objects and I used exclusion. I enjoy the color and the mood and the mix of 3 separate zones with the car lights creating a streak of color connecting the frame. I'm not heavily attached to it though. I am just learning how to do this. This is my second image.

Thats the way anything new goes. I do alot of alternative printing and its always a guessing game how things are going to turn out, and how people will reacto.

I really don't care much about the opinion of others for one simple reason: diversity of taste
I do enjoy the sport of art however and free reign to create regardless of whether it maps into the paradigm, knowledge, and language of the viewer.

So then why post?