Dustman Senior Member  885 posts Likes: 23 Joined Mar 2010 Location: New Jersey More info | Jan 21, 2011 12:38 | #1 I cross processed this 25 different ways. I narrowed it down to these 4, which i think are the best. But I have been starring at them for 30min on my screen (going crazy) and can not for the life of me decide which is more pleasing to the eye, or which is better.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 21, 2011 12:39 | #2 |
JOSX2 Senior Member 627 posts Likes: 4 Joined Jan 2011 Location: Mebane, NC (meh-ben) More info | Jan 21, 2011 12:48 | #3 *EDITED* website: Jim O'Sullivan Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dynamic03 Senior Member 341 posts Joined Jan 2010 More info | Jan 21, 2011 13:14 | #4 #1 or #3, I would prefer #3. Canon 5D Mark II | 135mm L | 24-70mm L | 100mm f/2.8 macro | 50mm f/1.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ledhed Goldmember  1,929 posts Joined Aug 2005 Location: Apsley, On. CAN. More info | Jan 21, 2011 13:45 | #5 #3, it has the LEAST color cast through the pic. Rob - "a photographer is a painter, in a hurry!"
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JOSX2 Senior Member 627 posts Likes: 4 Joined Jan 2011 Location: Mebane, NC (meh-ben) More info | Jan 21, 2011 13:50 | #6 ugh...hooked-on-phonics failed for me. I somehow read the subj. title as "post processing" (guess I saw 'processing' while skimming thru the subj. lines & thought it was 'post processing' website: Jim O'Sullivan Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Jan 21, 2011 13:54 | #7 I'll go out on a limb and suggest that cross processing doesnt really lend itself to this type of image. Cross processing sometimes works on edgy shots, in edgy scenes. In a straight up portrait with a clean background it looks like you are trying too hard to make the shot something its not. I vote #2, simply because it looks to be the most accurate.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 21, 2011 14:32 | #8 |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Jan 21, 2011 14:33 | #9 Better yet.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
HazYleaF Member  84 posts Joined Jan 2011 Location: Connecticut More info | Jan 21, 2011 16:33 | #10 I'd have to agree with Gonzogolf's assessment with cross processing... Never really works with indoor portraits for that matter. Edgy and outdoor portrait are great when using cross processing... Keep that in mind, as far as the portraits themselves, the original is fine the way it is... I'll go as far as saying #3 is also a nice one. Man with a Camera and Lens
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jan 21, 2011 17:35 | #11 gonzogolf wrote in post #11686740  I'll go out on a limb and suggest that cross processing doesnt really lend itself to this type of image. Cross processing sometimes works on edgy shots, in edgy scenes. In a straight up portrait with a clean background it looks like you are trying too hard to make the shot something its not. I vote #2, simply because it looks to be the most accurate. HazYleaF wrote in post #11687612 I'd have to agree with Gonzogolf's assessment with cross processing... Never really works with indoor portraits for that matter. Edgy and outdoor portrait are great when using cross processing... Keep that in mind, as far as the portraits themselves, the original is fine the way it is... I'll go as far as saying #3 is also a nice one.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JayyBee519 Member  131 posts Joined Jan 2011 More info | Jan 21, 2011 21:34 | #12 I really like the third one the best. | I race motocross for Suzuki of North America and Rockstar Energy Drink |
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 2598 guests, 166 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
