0

How's this effect done?

Forums > Digital imaging > How's this effect done?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    First · Prev | 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 | Next · Last
    gbay
    4
    36 forum posts
    24 May 2008 - 4:41 PM
    0

    hi all, just been checking out these photos: http://photo.net/photos/rarindra
    i absolutley love the light he has. how has he managed to achieve the light? i pressume photoshop has something to do with it?
    is it clever colour balancing? the backgrounds look almost misty.

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links
    24 May 2008 - 4:41 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    NickParry
    NickParry (Critique Team)
    6
    1016 forum postsNickParry vcard Wales79 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 4:47 PM
    0

    Firstly, its the location.

    Secondly, I don't think the light has been messed around with that much really.

    Thirdly, I think the photographer has used the 'Orton Effect' in the post-production. (just google 'Orton Effect')

    Nick

    Last Modified By NickParry at 24 May 2008 - 4:49 PM
    mad-dogs
    24 May 2008 - 4:50 PM
    0

    Probably more to do with the weather and lighting conditions in their location than Photoshop manipulation. Possible boosting saturation a bit.

    I'm a great fan of their work and think it is some of the best photography I've seen.

    Last Modified By mad-dogs at 24 May 2008 - 4:53 PM
    NevP
    6
    851 forum posts Canada13 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 5:07 PM
    0

    I've not seen this work before. I'm totally blown away by it. I would say the original shots are composed beautifully, and the processing looks to me to involve the most minute detail work, together with globally applied effects to backgrounds with excellent masking and a superlative workflow. Wow. Holy crap!

    Coleslaw
    Coleslaw (e2 Member)
    6
    12761 forum postsColeslaw vcard Wales27 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 5:31 PM
    0

    Stunning.

    *I too don't think there is much done in PS.

    Last Modified By Coleslaw at 24 May 2008 - 5:32 PM

    Hate to be cynical here, but the manipulation and post processing is so, so heavy in 99% of Rarinda's work. I can't remember which photograph the comment is attached to, but someone drew attention to a specific PS plug-in or separate software program that creates the light you see in his shots. So many of them are so similar, I don't want to discredit them by saying that they are fake, they are just a whole new type of photography, photo-art as it seems to be becoming labelled. Here, a base photo is taken that may be well composed and well lit, and completely remastered in PS or other photo-editing software to represent something way beyond what the human eye saw or what the conditions truly were. This goes against the other comments above that seem to have been taken in by the easy belief that if the photos are true then they too might one day capture such scenes. I wish it were so, but taking the whole portfolio in view it is clear that similar effects have been over-applied to a majority of shots, the exceptions being what proves the rule. Rarinda is a good photographer, but he is a master P-Processer, as the above comments would indicate. Still, it's no less art, it just isn't photography in the truest sense of writing with *real* light...

    Last Modified By JamesAppleton at 24 May 2008 - 6:14 PM
    alwolf
    4
    341 forum posts England3 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 6:19 PM
    0

    Well they look Bloody good to me

    Chris_L
    24 May 2008 - 6:20 PM
    0

    There's a few people, me included, who'd be tempted to try that plug-in out.

    It even seems to create backlighting of hair and shadows in the correct place, you sure it's a plug-in?

    I'm more convinced the guy is fortunate with light and expert at exploiting it

    Last Modified By Chris_L at 24 May 2008 - 6:24 PM
    NickParry
    NickParry (Critique Team)
    6
    1016 forum postsNickParry vcard Wales79 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 6:24 PM
    0

    Hmm, not convinced by the plugin theory. If there is one out there I would certainly like a copy too Smile

    It is possible to fake that look, and I am off to try lol

    Nick

    csurry
    10
    9221 forum posts91 Constructive Critique Points
    24 May 2008 - 6:31 PM
    0

    I remember seeing a tutorial to achieve this kind of look. It was a picture of cowboys riding through a glade I think. Can't remember where I saw it, but I'll have a think and see if I can find it.

    Autofx.com is worth checking out, you can do something similar with this, but as with most pug-ins it is about having a good shot in the first place suitable for the treatment.

    As with all things best done in moderation rather than on every image as this person seems to have done.

    The light-rays are a plug-in, of that I'm pretty sure. The misted shots are dodged/burnt in a way that I have no knowledge of, but he's used well-lit photos that already have the backlighting of the hair et al. I'm amazed you guys can look at all the photos as a mass body of work and not instantly see the same effects repeated time after time. Unless this guy took all those photos on the same day with a whole load of models trapsing round after him, I can't see nature being that consistent. He's just good at applying his style to photos that will benefit well from it, so it requires photographic skill to start, but the end result is more software based rather than real.

    Chris_L
    24 May 2008 - 6:45 PM
    0

    I say they aren't a plug-in. The plug-in would have to be too intelligent to create those shadows automatically. Misty climate, sun low to the left, bit of fill light perhaps in post pro.

    Be happy for you to prove me wrong.

    Last Modified By Chris_L at 24 May 2008 - 6:45 PM

    If you re-read my above post, you'll see that the plug-in is for the light rays. The mist effect is done by selective dodge/burn. The only way I can prove you wrong is to get hold of one of Rarinda's original RAW files, provided he shoots RAW. He has had a huge number of requests on the site to do so, and has never replied.

    The shadows you talk about in that photo are suspect anyway - the shortest child has a shadow just as long as his taller companions, the arm is missing from the child with the ball, as is his curved posture - it would look straight to us but with the angle of the sun would produce a curved shadow and two arms shadows, as would the furthest left child have a wider profile due to being more angled to the sun. The contrast in the photo in so man background areas is clearly flattened, either too much shadow detail brought out or simply overcast conditions that have been light-faked later. Likewise, look at the tree leaves top left - minimal contrast there despite the fact that if this was real, the furthest and outer leaves would be sunlit and the inner ones in shade. Doesn't look that way to me...

    This isn't a plug-in, it's some very inspired use of dodging and burning, and no loss of respect to the man for having mastered that...

    Chris_L
    24 May 2008 - 6:59 PM
    0

    You could be right, but he might just shoot with the sun in the correct place. Be odd to go to so much trouble to fake the shadows and get them wrong. Find the light-ray plug in and you might start to convince me.. Smile

    StrayCat
    24 May 2008 - 7:04 PM
    0

    Autofx mystical lighting, or some of these. Nik's new colour and lighting effects program is amazing. Look at the samples. Also, they're all available for free 15 day demo.

    Last Modified By StrayCat at 24 May 2008 - 7:05 PM
    First · Prev | 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 | Next · Last

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.