• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

I broke an inviolable rule

ron_hiner

New member
The rule is... Never, never, never get text in an image, unless the text itself is the subject. The reason is that the eye goes straight to the text first.

So, this is sort of an iconic image... one just like you'll see all week long in any newspaper or news magazine. I shot it yesterday with a D3, 70-200 zoom. Auto everything. Apologies that the exif data was stripped out on downsampling process.

I look at this shot, and I sorta like it, but the very last thing I look at is the candidate. Where do your eyes go first -- and last?

Journalists are not allowed, but portrait artists are: what would you do in post to get the subject to pop more? (edit and repost welcome)


dsc_2868.jpg


Ron
 
Last edited:

janet Smith

pro member
I look at this shot, and I sorta like it, but the very last thing I look at is the candidate. Where do your eyes go first -- and last?

Journalists are not allowed, but portrait artists are: what would you do in post to get the subject to pop more? (edit and repost welcome)Ron


Hi Ron

Here's my attempt, (very quickly/crudely done - sorry, rushing!) my eye was distracted to the lady on his left, so I selected him > then inverse > file > blur > gaussian blur > 8.0 pixels, deselect > history brush around the edges, I'm sure it would be easy to do this and produce a much better result if one were to spend more time on it. Just an idea....

OPF1.jpg
 

ron_hiner

New member
Jan -- interesting approach. thank you. The lady is the candidate's wife.
It might work by reducing brightness in those areas instead of -- or in addition to-- adding blur.
 
Man his wife is pretty! Is that reason enough to vote for him? So she could be first lady? Sorry, I digress. Am I in danger of having my voter card revoked for such a comment? :)

Seriously, I like the blue tones throughout, good lighting. However the bokeh on the letters is definitely distracting! I wonder if there is some way of reducing that effect ( the dark/light overlap of the letter shapes).

Would a dodge or burn on the letters help significantly? When I get home maybe I'll give it a test.
 
Last edited:

Kathy Rappaport

pro member
PArt of the parcel

While the no text rules is applicable to portraits, in the context of political campaigns and the sad state of real political knowledge, I LIKE THE TEXT! It gives the uneducated masses context about the man in the image.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Ron,

I'm happy with the picture as first shown with the signs except I'd love even more space above the candidate! The picture with the signs makes it work! As the signs and other "distractions" are obfuscated so does the meaning get washed away. Bland focus can render the photograph impotent.

If you have the complete sign behind McCain, that, IMHO, would be better as it implies context and shows what one man has to rise to in order to be considered to have the stature to win an election for President.

Also if there are a sea of people that have been cropped away, consider adding them back!

Cropping is great for artistry but context is even more important for news!

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Yes, Alain, a pleasant edit. If such a format was wanted, I'd prefer to add space above his head and to the left side, but that's my taste. To be sure, many might prefer this closely cropped image.

This version of Ron's picture of Senator McCain does indeed show less distraction; but we have lost context of the candidate making his case before voters.

Tighltly cropped, the speaker could be talking at a sports rally!

Asher

Also, if this was what was wanted, I'd want to lose the 3rd hand on the left!
 
Ron,
first of all - nice capture!

And here's my repost attempt.

All the standard issues:
desaturate the crowd, curves-based pop on the senator, slight radial blur on the crowd towards the senator.

251225565-L.jpg


Hope you like it:)
 

Zach Jacob

New member
Here's my take
mccrap.jpg


I did eliptical marquee around the subject, feathered to 75 px, select inverse, copy, paste, layer blending mode set to "multiply" to darken the areas that aren't the subject, then I used the blur filter on this layer until I was satisfied with the degree of blur in the audience. Then I selected the subject again in the base layer, again with the eliptical marquee and feather to 75, copy, paste, and set the blending bode to "Screen" to lighten him up and further the contrast between the candidate and the background. Then I just played a little with brightness/contrast.

Again, it was quick and I could probably do better if I spent more time on it.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Janet, Ed, Zach and Nikolai,

All these modifications to decrease emphasis on the "clutter", IMHO, help focus on the artistic, social and political context. What I'm concerned about is the gap between these improvements and the original. In general I believe that parsimonious alterations are sufficient clues for the brain. So I'd blend back these new versions with about 40-90% of the original. After all we need the harsh reality of facing an intelligent and eager audience that must be convinced and energized. They are also part of the main subject's social and political needs.

Asher
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
Man his wife is pretty! Is that reason enough to vote for him? So she could be first lady? Sorry, I digress. Am I in danger of having my voter card revoked for such a comment? :)

Seriously, I like the blue tones throughout, good lighting. However the bokeh on the letters is definitely distracting! I wonder if there is some way of reducing that effect ( the dark/light overlap of the letter shapes).

Would a dodge or burn on the letters help significantly? When I get home maybe I'll give it a test.
Yep ,Cindy is going to be a nice looking first lady :) Taken in SC before he won it. Don

img3704editjm1.jpg
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I bet if it had been Michelle Obama I would have gotten tons of comments :)
Don
Don,

I just want the politicians to get regularly fed watered and cared for so they don't screw up more than their predecessors. To much pressure on these folk! I'd just like them to be honest, and that is what McCaine is. Talking a good talk is fine, preachers do it. But they never have to deliver a washing machine or salvation, they just have to promise! I want someone who can generate a power force around him/her so that people realize that there is a leader.

Nowhere does the looks of the spouse come into this.

Also, the picture as is, untidy is proof that it was taken at a real rally somewhere small and not staged for the press. It's unfortunate that the picture of a Senator speaking to constituents for their support is not sufficient in itself!

Asher
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
Don,

I just want the politicians to get regularly fed watered and cared for so they don't screw up more than their predecessors. To much pressure on these folk! I'd just like them to be honest, and that is what McCaine is. Talking a good talk is fine, preachers do it. But they never have to deliver a washing machine or salvation, they just have to promise! I want someone who can generate a power force around him/her so that people realize that there is a leader.

Nowhere does the looks of the spouse come into this.

Also, the picture as is, untidy is proof that it was taken at a real rally somewhere small and not staged for the press. It's unfortunate that the picture of a Senator speaking to constituents for their support is not sufficient in itself!

Asher

Yea I took it in SC .It is untidy ? I just posted it to show members how pretty she is up close because one commented in the posts above about her beauty . A picture of the spouse could be though historical because she very well could be first lady .
IN LR I have more space to the left and it is cropped at top better .

I posted a thread in this forum from some pics at that town hall meeting and not to start a flame but had they been of Obama and Michelle I feel there would have been more interest :)
Don
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
My reference to "untidy" meant only as something I actually like in a sgrabbed shot news story like this, applied only to the first photograph of McCain the candidate speaking to supporters.

I did that since people can object to letters being blocked out, distractions etc, when all I care about is the newsworthy genuineness the image conveys. Iconic/heroic and pristinely composed pictures are usually staged. McCaine represents transparency, honest and keeping his words.

His wife? I don't look at her beauty. I am just happy she is supporting him and helps his campaign. Her picture shows a caring involved wife and I like that a lot. Loyalty and support are really to be valued. Beauty, however, although sought after, is an attribute that does but shouldn't alter our candidate choice!

Asher
 

John Poulsen

New member
I like the first shot just the way it is. The Text in the photo is relevent to the context of the image. The space in front of the subject is just right; and the people in that space again is relevent to whom the subject is speaking to. Mr. McCaine's wife in the background again is in perfect position; in the background as support for her husband(the subject). Your eyes go to her but she stops it from leaving the photo. Even the guy with the yellow hat balances out the senetor's wife's red blouse creating a push-pull effect for your eyes to go back and forth never leaving the photo. I like it! It works for me.
 
Top