Forum Replies Created
March 25, 2016 at 7:00 pm in reply to: Honest Opinions? #92825
One thing I wanted to say is to be mindful of what’s going on in the backgrounds of your images. I like the one of the girl with the red skirt, against the wooden door – but the metal panel (vertical) strutting out on the right of her head is distracting, nice background except for this.
Another example is the couple by the tree, the tree is just coming right out of her head. Strong visual elements in the background – especially emerging from the figure take the attention away from the subject.March 25, 2016 at 6:48 pm in reply to: Lay it on me #92824
I don’t think you’re a fauxtog – you’re someone who’s just starting out – that’s very different. Unless you are charging money? I get the impression you’re not but then question the need for a watermark?
Tbh, he does sound like a bit of an asshole. I would be mad if my partner told me my work was pants – even if it was lol! Let people who don’t know you give objective opinions – he’s supposed to tell you you rock! OR at least be nice about telling you you don’t! 🙂February 28, 2016 at 2:47 pm in reply to: is it safe? #92774
ahh cool, I’ve missed this site! glad it’s been fixed 🙂December 18, 2015 at 3:34 am in reply to: Scarecrow, I'll miss you most of all… #89129
Thanks for starting this thread Eyedoc. This has been on my mind for some time, I occasionally pop back hoping it will be back to normal but no it’s all gone a bit Pete Tong hasn’t it 🙁 . Oh well, it was a great site and I’m glad I caught some of the good times – it used to crack me up! For quite a while this was my favourite site, not just because it was hilarious, but mainly because it actually was a really good place for learning, with regulars who had real passion for photography, and did get affronted and vocal about all the dire stuff out there – there needs to be more of this. Thanks to everyone for making this such a great site until the spammers took over. Happy holidays everyone!June 16, 2015 at 2:40 pm in reply to: Masking tools #25701
Thanks WCS, I think it would be more for the latter type scenario, fur and hair on light backgrounds with softer light. I’ll give topaz a go I think.
Thanks for your advice guys.June 16, 2015 at 2:35 pm in reply to: a web-based sitcom… FOR US!!! #25700
I watched all four episodes 🙂 Thanks for posting it eyedoc. I do agree though it wasn’t hilarious but I like the premise.
I’m surprised fauxtography as a subject hasn’t been more tapped into by comedians.June 11, 2015 at 2:25 pm in reply to: Masking tools #25680
Thanks for the link CC, that’s a really helpful video.
Lol Eyedoc! I forgot about that dude – what have I been worrying about?! 😉June 11, 2015 at 9:37 am in reply to: Masking tools #25677
We cross posted WCS, can I ask what it was more successful on and what it wasn’t? Or was it random? I’d be using it mostly for cutting out hair and maybe fur as that’s what I struggle with on photoshop.June 11, 2015 at 9:34 am in reply to: Masking tools #25676
Thanks guys, yes I will try those out – I painted and drew most of my life and never had any issue so a tablet with a pen sounds like a good solution – I’ll give it a whirl. I really appreciate your suggestions – thank you.June 10, 2015 at 2:18 pm in reply to: Masking tools #25672
Thank you both. The refine selection is really good now but I have RSI in my hand so am hoping to find something to allow me to mask areas more quickly and thus less painfully 🙂
The topaz one looks really good from those videos – thanks for the links Eyedoc.
One more thought, if you haven’t seen them, you may like the work of Harry Callahan; he did really great images of small figures in vast spaces.
I like the term portraitscape!
I am so relieved, I have been trying to remember that word for years lol, baby brain has a lot to answer for! 🙂
It’s ruckenfigur 🙂 Kind of applies to some of your pieces.
This may be interesting for you to look at too,
I agree with IHF, just keep going, it’s very interesting.
There’s a name for this kind of imagery, a large scale scene with a figure in it, who is part of the scene rather than it being a portrait. It’s a german word (those guys have words for everything!) – I think it comes from romanticism. Unfortunately I can’t for the life of me recall it and it’s been driving me crazy for years!
Personally i’d take out looming. I get that each piece is significant to you of course. But to objective eyes, they are very similar and again, IMO, oceans is stronger. Placing them alongside one another I think detracts and creates a sense of repetition. Include what you like in your portfolio, it’s your call, often, work that is deeply personal and meaningful to the creator is missed by it’s viewers – that’s art for you, my favourite photo on flickr has never even had one hit lol 🙂
Another suggestion is to separate it from oceans, which would allow the viewer to interpret it on it’s own ground, rather than connecting it to ‘oceans’, consciously or not. Only my thoughts.