GWTW Forum
September 23, 2014, 09:29 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Forum Info Login Register Chat  
Welcome to the GWTW Forum.
Guests (non-registered users) can view the forum but are unable to post.  If you don't have anything to say then why would you bother to register?
One of the most popular sections of the GWTW Forum has long been the Swap Meet.  A great place to sell old, seldom flown kites or to get great deals on used (gently flown) kites.  Only registered users can see the Swap Meet section, let alone wheel and deal.  1000's (literally) of kites have changed hands thanks to the Swap Meet.
There are several more benefits to being a registered user, but you'll have to join our little community to find out all the "secrets".
Questions or concerns? Contact Steve ... just drop an email to: forum.gwtwkites@gmail.com

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: "Fact or Fantasy"  (Read 1672 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« on: January 09, 2012, 11:16 AM »

I just watched a small inde movie called "Mars" which was shot as an animated short using people and green screen. Movies are more and more putting in whatever background they want. We certainly don't seem to mind.

But in photos, we expect some degree of truth. It's a picture and as they use to say, "Photos don't lie". That was true before the digital age and digital manipulation. Bad, good. Do you have the right to know if a photo has been altered? Certainly not in advertising, where models become poreless, super skinny and whatever else the photo editor demands.

I took some photos of Mark's Focus Jinx. The sky was blue, very blue. You can only do so much with the sun as a background to alter the pictures. So into the cloud vault kept on my computer of pictures taken some time in the past. Cleaning up all the rough spots around the kite and lines took about 45 minutes. Toyed with blurring the background a bit to give it that shorter depth of field look of a close shot, but that felt like cheating.  Wink

Hyperlinked photos:

« Last Edit: January 09, 2012, 11:23 AM by chilese » Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
WinterDaze
Trade Count: (+1)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


Location: Melbourne, Australia

« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2012, 09:22 PM »

Hey JC,

Smiley I choose not to disclose the % of 'touching' I do professionally, read into that: 'lots, but no one want's to know' Wink

Now the problem you have is that although it's hard to put into words, the mash up you've done has a rookie error in it (tongue firmly in cheek Wink )

It's the 2 different lenses used, for the landscape I'm guessing around the 35-50mm area and the kite was shot I'm thinking at around the 70-80mm when you merge these 2 perspectives you throw all the pespectives out slightly in the brain and it goes... 'hmmmm there's something a little odd about that shot'. If you get that feeling the dual perspectives are generally the cause half the time, the other half is left/right lighting which you've handled very well, both strong sunlit shots lit from upper right  Cool

Nice job on the detail masking Smiley

WD

Logged

WinterDaze AoF
Gardner
Trade Count: (+5)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 130

Location:

« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2012, 09:42 PM »

I have a problem with "monkeying around" with photos for publication as fact which punches my ethics button.The reason being because I was a news photog for almost 40 years and believe that the scene of whatever is shot as newsworthy should be presented as is.  Advertising shots don't count -- that's fantasy nor do personal photos because those are for the photogs own pleasure. However, when shown to another person the viewer deserves to know  the picture has been enhanced.
Logged
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2012, 02:02 AM »

WD,

Thanks for your comments.

I went back and checked both photos for their metadata.

Both pictures were shot with the same camera and the same lens.

The background was shot at a Focal length of 43mm (35mm equiv) (right in the middle of the range you "guessed", nice)  Smiley

The kite was shot at a Focal length of 52mm (35mm equiv) at a distance of about 30 feet. I was using the 30 foot "photo" lineset and was piloting the kite at the time.

Your ability to tell the difference in perspective is much better than mine. Aside from the background being too "in focus" compared to the kite, I thought the 2 pics went together fairly well.

Neither photo was enlarged or shrunk when they were merged.

I still might go back and blur the background just a touch to see if that helps with the believability.

Gardner,

I agree with you about photos for publication, if the "publication" is news journalism in nature.

But even the Kent state famous photo was altered and that was long before the digital cameras had made the scene. It seems editors just can't leave the "truth" alone.  Smiley
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 02:34 AM by chilese » Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
B-13
Trade Count: (+5)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


Location: Port Louis, Mauritius

« Reply #4 on: January 10, 2012, 04:10 AM »

Smiley
What an interesting thread here.
Regarding what is real and not, everything here is real but not true!
John had a nice job done in masking and collage here and resizing the kite could have given a bit more of fact here although i don't see any fantasy here Smiley
WD is right with the perspective theory and blurring the background to put some truth in the DOF is a good idea but if we use a hyperfocal distance focusing method here, we should get a sharp kite with an acceptably sharp background. But for this to work we need a small aperture f16-f22 and shutter would have been lowered resulting in a more blurry kite due to motion  Wink. Anyway we are well lit here so lets say exposure was about 1/320s..enough to expose at f16 and to freeze motion of the kite in the air.
I myself, even if i do not use collage method, i manually blend exposures of the same scene to enlarge my dynamic range when even my filters will not cover the whole scene. Not actually the cartoonish HDR we see from many folks, but a most fine blended photo matching reality at the time taken.

Personally one error (if we can call it like this) i see from the picture is not treating and processing the final collated layers with the same adjustments. Final layered photo if the pictures were not edited individually before, need to be processed and flattened to avoid pixel interpolation between two or multiple layers Smiley
I downloaded your photos and did some basics editing on it. Sorry i took it without asking permission but at the time i am posting, you are flying your Solus in your dreams Smiley

Overall, this is a nice montage and reducing the kite size would have been a bit better IMO.

B

« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 04:12 AM by B-13 » Logged

Proud Member of Kitelife.com #943 Smiley
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2012, 08:48 AM »

B-13

I have sent you the 2 originals (.jpg format as I don't shoot RAW).

Would love to see your interpretation if you feel inclined.

I went back and blurred the background a bit and played with slightly smaller kite sizes.
Also played with adjustments on the background.

Didn't like the blurred background, although the smaller kite size worked well.  Smiley

Still, the photo I posted is my personal favorite "version".

Thanks for your inputs.  Smiley
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 08:51 AM by chilese » Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2012, 11:13 AM »

I believe it.

Shenkman flying a Rev.

What more do you need to know?
Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
B-13
Trade Count: (+5)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


Location: Port Louis, Mauritius

« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2012, 11:17 AM »

John, received your mail and will work on it soon.

SKB, this is not fake motion blur on the kite and flyer arms, converging lines to the handles look OK

but the image composition and bad focus make this a unique AUTHENTIC picture.
am i right?
Logged

Proud Member of Kitelife.com #943 Smiley
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2012, 11:22 AM »

Kite Party 9
Shenkman flies a dualie.

Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
B-13
Trade Count: (+5)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 213


Location: Port Louis, Mauritius

« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2012, 11:26 AM »

Then you are the Merlin in photography world John..
Good montage here Wink
Logged

Proud Member of Kitelife.com #943 Smiley
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2012, 11:54 AM »

Now I'm confused.

Shenkman on the dual-line Shadow is the original.

The photo is linked if you want to look at a larger version.

Then skb™ made the Rev/Shenkman version for another thread
on this Forum from a few months ago. For as quickly as he
posted his version, he must have been flying around the pic
with his clone broom.
Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
chilese
Global Moderator
Trade Count: (+5)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3042


Location: Las Vegas, NV

WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2012, 12:12 PM »

Similar background changes done due to my aversion to bland blue sky in originals:


https://picasaweb.google.com/110054276296809616662/CustomRevolutionKites#5427817607618230882
https://picasaweb.google.com/110054276296809616662/CustomRevolutionKites#5427817589327374130
https://picasaweb.google.com/110054276296809616662/CustomRevolutionKites#5427817595368096834
https://picasaweb.google.com/110054276296809616662/CustomRevolutionKites#5427817603041891490 (least convincing)
https://picasaweb.google.com/110054276296809616662/CustomRevolutionKites#5427817617032857122
Logged

John Chilese: Las Vegas, NV
http://picasaweb.google.com/chilesej
DD
Trade Count: (+16)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


Location: Ohio USA

« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2012, 06:40 PM »

Does this look fake to anyone else?  Cheesy

clickable thumbnail

I think at times it's about lookin as if it's fake, that is the point. I think you can make just about anything look real without trying too hard.
I also think the lighting is off on the quad.
Or maybe just because I knew it  was a fake based on the subject matter?Grin mind over matter?Cool
Logged

Sine Metu!
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


items purchased through the links below help support the forum

Cal Custom

Our forum is made possible by the good folks whose ads appear below and by the members of our community (PayPal donation button at bottom)
In case you missed it each ad is linked to the sponsors web site.  So please, take a moment and visit our sponsors sites as this forum wouldn't be possible with out them.
Interested in running an ad for your business or kiting event?  Contact Steve at advertise.gwtwkites@gmail.com for a quote.

kmacFab
kmacFab

Kite Classifieds Ad
Kite Classifieds

A Wind Of Change
A Wind Of Change

Kitebookie
Kitebookie.com

Untitled Document

Untitled Document
Untitled Document

Untitled Document
Untitled Document


Untitled Document
DOLLAR SHAVE CLUB

Support the GWTW Forum

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.2.1 © 2008-2009
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!