| Author |
Message |
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 8:51 pm
|  |
I thought this could be used with any object like the dog wanted it so much. What do you think?
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
53.55 KB |
| Viewed: |
1227 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
64.21 KB |
| Viewed: |
1227 Time(s) |
|
|
|
ruxpriencdiam
Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 26313
Location: Third Stone from the Sun
|
|
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 8:59 pm
| |
Look at the hair on the back of the neck.
The unclean area from post processing.
It could work if you can shoot it and clean it up right.
|
|
jhuls
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 1047
|
|
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 9:22 pm
| |
I like the idea but the isolation is done poorly, it will never get accepted as is. Redo the isolation and then post it again.
|
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39269
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 11:55 pm
| |
Agree...very poor isolation. Time wasted. get it right in camera. How much is 25 cents of your time worth trying to fix something.???
|
|
mattgibson
Joined: 11 Nov 2009
Posts: 601
Location: London
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:38 am
| |
Can't tell about focus either, that is not 100% crop
|
|
nadger
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
Posts: 259
Location: God only knows
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 5:06 am
| |
I can see this being popular if the isolation is improved (assuming it's sharp)
|
|
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:22 am
| |
| jhuls wrote: | | I like the idea but the isolation is done poorly, it will never get accepted as is. Redo the isolation and then post it again. |
Agree with you and ruxpriencdiam as well. I am going to redo the isolation. This shot was with an improvised white background since I have no studio and have not all the equipment to shoot a picture like this.
My dog is a very smart one and she makes many tricks in exchange for food lol
The problem is that she moves too fast and it is hard to get composition and focus and still try to handle the light.
I know must of you would say to me that if you have no conditions don't take the shot, but I enjoy all this messs lol...
|
|
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:32 am
| |
| mattgibson wrote: | | Can't tell about focus either, that is not 100% crop |
No, you are wrong. This is a 100% crop. The base picture is a crop from the original. That is the reason the crop looks larger than it should be.
The ratio between one photo and its crop depends on the base photo pixels count. The only caution I take is to observe that the base stands for SS minimum requirement.
|
|
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:49 am
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | Agree...very poor isolation. Time wasted. get it right in camera. How much is 25 cents of your time worth trying to fix something.??? |
Yeah, it took time and the result, Now that I look in more detail, make me ashamed of it :-)
But looking for the bright side, my main intention at this moment is not making money but learn and improve all my weaknesses(as you can see there is plenty of them :) )
My edition skills are very poor. The only tools that makes me feel comfortable are the basic ones. The ones you apply in the picture as a whole.
But I am a fast learner and I think you will see improvement in short (Am I being cocky :-) ?).
|
|
jhuls
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 1047
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:50 am
| |
| luizeduardo wrote: | | mattgibson wrote: | | Can't tell about focus either, that is not 100% crop |
No, you are wrong. This is a 100% crop. The base picture is a crop from the original. That is the reason the crop looks larger than it should be.
The ratio between one photo and its crop depends on the base photo pixels count. The only caution I take is to observe that the base stands for SS minimum requirement. |
Are you sure it meets minimum requirements then? That crop doesn't seem close enough to meet the 4MP requirement.
|
|
robhainer
Joined: 03 May 2010
Posts: 2773
Location: Dallas, GA, USA
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:55 am
| |
You don't really need a studio to do it. I use one of those cheap white vinyl table cloths you can buy at a party store and shoot my flash through it to make the background white. Then I use the dodge tool to clean up what it misses. I use a second flash as my main light and a reflector as my fill light, so I can basic people isolations with just two lights, when it would typically take at least four.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
121.16 KB |
| Viewed: |
1046 Time(s) |
|
|
|
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:25 pm
| |
| jhuls wrote: | | luizeduardo wrote: | | mattgibson wrote: | | Can't tell about focus either, that is not 100% crop |
No, you are wrong. This is a 100% crop. The base picture is a crop from the original. That is the reason the crop looks larger than it should be.
The ratio between one photo and its crop depends on the base photo pixels count. The only caution I take is to observe that the base stands for SS minimum requirement. |
Are you sure it meets minimum requirements then? That crop doesn't seem close enough to meet the 4MP requirement. |
jhuls, I a'm sure this picture fits.
Roughly speaking, you can divide a picture in 16 zones (they have to be proportional) and if your crop fits into the resultant area it means your picture is larger than the minimum 4MB.
(metric system)
ok, let me explain a little bit: a square of 2.000 pixels each side makes a 4.000.000 picture. This is the minimum, right? A square like this accommodates 16 crops (4X4). The math is the same regardless shape be it a triangle or a non square polygon. So, if the crop fits into one zone it means the zone is larger than the minimum and so is the picture. Look a hand made division in the main picture and compare one token with the crop.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
42.19 KB |
| Viewed: |
1036 Time(s) |
|
|
|
luizeduardo
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:38 pm
| |
| robhainer wrote: | | You don't really need a studio to do it. I use one of those cheap white vinyl table cloths you can buy at a party store and shoot my flash through it to make the background white. Then I use the dodge tool to clean up what it misses. I use a second flash as my main light and a reflector as my fill light, so I can basic people isolations with just two lights, when it would typically take at least four. |
Even something as simple as a table cloth could not be found at home :-) I took one of my daughters and together, we have glued some A4 white papers.
I am going to buy some proper white background as soon as I have time to look for it. In Brasil, depending on where you live, photography equipment is hard to find.
|
|
jeffbanke
Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 17468
Location: www.xlr8photo.com, The real California
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 4:02 pm
| |
Good concept, your dog should sell well if you get the isolation down
|
|
marcusvdt
Joined: 12 Feb 2009
Posts: 1204
Location: www.flashbackfoto.com.br or www.facebook.com/flashbackfoto
|
|
Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:12 pm
| |
| luizeduardo wrote: | | robhainer wrote: | | You don't really need a studio to do it. I use one of those cheap white vinyl table cloths you can buy at a party store and shoot my flash through it to make the background white. Then I use the dodge tool to clean up what it misses. I use a second flash as my main light and a reflector as my fill light, so I can basic people isolations with just two lights, when it would typically take at least four. |
Even something as simple as a table cloth could not be found at home :-) I took one of my daughters and together, we have glued some A4 white papers.
I am going to buy some proper white background as soon as I have time to look for it. In Brasil, depending on where you live, photography equipment is hard to find. |
You probably could do the isolation better with the right procedure. But nothing is better, more efficient, easier, than doing it on camera.
Focus and foreground lighting look ok to me. Concept also is good.
You can buy regular TNT for animals/babies/objects of this size. It is found anywhere and its width is 1.4m which can be enough for this type of shot.
|
|
| |
|
Log in
