Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

Yeah thats better but still there, like when you really turn on the sharpness and edge enchancement on your TV or did you go overboard with the sharpening tool in photoshop !

Here is a comparision of different ISO http://digital-photography-school.com/h ... hotography

Yea I may have gone overboard with sharpening. But I think high ISO was the main reason.

--- Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:31 pm ---

Lovely Nucleus.

Come on mate push yourself and be creative, think out of the box, everybody does stuff like greenery, plants, skylines etc etc. And if you prefer to do those do it in a different and creative manner.

Not putting you down but trying to push you to be better more creative and out of the box.

Here is an example from a good friend of mine who is a hobby photographer of a skyline as an example



Another pic from another good buddy hobby photographer



You know you've made something amazing when a few people really hate it, some think its just OK but a majority of people just love it ! When everyone thinks its nice, thats means you've made something thats mediorce at best. And we don't want to be or do mediorce now do we

I know you can do better, now get clicking !

Nice photos. That kind of photos takes bit more effort to go to the right locations. I might try to do those if I get time.

--- Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:52 pm ---

I can put a better one of mine but it has my real name on it.

--- Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:59 pm ---

Removed the name, here is one of my better one:

LOL its ironic, my friends also have similar subject matter pics, maybe there is limited number of things worth being photgraphed here I'll post them so you can compare yours to theirs.






Can you see whats wrong with this pic ? Other the burj being pink ! lol

One of them is supposed to be a professional photographer, can you guess which one ?

Beautiful photos guys!

Thanks for the photos.

DDS, I think pink one is the pro. And it seems that photo had lot of additions and removals in photoshop. Pink color overlay is the obvious, then he added lens flare. Which is not an issue though, that photo is not my liking, but others might like it.

But it seems like there is also additions and removal of the artifacts. In the left bottom corner there is a problem with sea horizon.

As for amature vs pro, some of the amatures I've seen are much better than average professionals here but they don't know how to earn money. I know somebody who went to a pro for making an ad for their company and the pro did mediocre work on the photos. The ones who take picture perfect photos for the magazines are very expensive here and their costs goes above dhs 100,000 for their work. They didn't pay any less for average pro either but the job was not even average.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:34 am ---

As for the subject matter, I think it is because we don't want to go out of our comfort zone but there are more subjects here. But it takes time and wee bit more effort to move around and carry the gear.

Mario45 wrote:Anyone can make a mediocre photo look special with the aid of photoshop etc.

Photoshop is a necessary skill if you want to be a pro, and not everyone is good at it. It is well demanded, but if it is mediocre photoshop editing then it is not a pro level job.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:45 pm ---

Rhein II is the most expensive photograph ever sold (US$4.3 million) to date, and it is edited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II

Mario45 wrote:but you are not a pro, so why take the fun out of a hobby by trying to make it look like a proffessional job?

(1) I like to be a pro.

(2) It is fun.

(3) I wasn't talking about myself.



This one is photoshoped: http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos- ... 7661_n.jpg

Does it look like photoshoped?

Mario45 ,

Because some people take extreme pride in their hobby and want it to be the best it can be? People who do things as hobbies can be better at it from a professional. For many people who turn hobbies into a profession, it becomes more about money.

Mario45 ,

Photos being altered is nothing new. It's just affordable and available to anyone who has an interest in photography.

There is nothing wrong with someone turning their hobby into a profession, if they're good at it, then why on earth not. I don't know many photographers these days, amatuers and pros who don't use computers to enhance their work. Think about the camera itself these days - are people using film? No they are not. I have photographic qualifications, I used to process and develop my own films and tone them aswell. Merely taking an image from camera to computer for enhancement is just another stage in the process thse days.

You can take the blandest image possible and turn it into something spectacular - all it needs is a bit of creativity and know-how, that's where real talent comes from.

It means I studied it at university, I have a GCSE and part of my degree is in photography. These days the majority of media is digitally enhanced. Do you think what you see on the telly is shot on film? Nope, it's shot on digi-beta, edited and enhanced in computers. Even movies shot on traditional film all get the computer treatment these days. It's simply moving with the times and enhancements in technology. But it doesn't mean the creative process is any less. A person can still have a good eye, be able to make good composition and choose good subjects.

I think you don't really understand how time consuming it can be to work on pictures to make them look really good. Cameras are all digital these days for a reason, it makes things much, much quicker, but people still take the time to edit their photographs afterwards.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:13 pm ---

I used to have to produce images for magazines. Do you know how long it takes to simply set up each shot? All your lighting has to be correct, the product has to be styled correctly, light metres etc etc, it takes forever, but still some enhancements are required during the editing process. When working outside, you can't always wait for the weather to be perfect, you can't always carry around a full lighting set-up. These days it's easier and more efficient to edit in computer to make an image look right. Plus as I've already stated a person can let their imagination run wild and make some fantastic creations.

I guarantee you every photo you see these days has been enhanced. I disagree that it's maufactured, all people are doing is taking a good image and making it better.

Here's a great example, a friend of mine - professional photographer has this blog: http://www.clearandtransparent.com/blog/

Hover over the images and it displays the original and then the enhanced image. There is nothing 'fake' looking about the enhanced images as they've been done so well.

LOL sorry dude, but your last comment just means you have zero imagination. Man, I'd hate to live in your mind - booooring!

Mario45 wrote:I don't know if it looks photoshopped as I don't know what it looked like before.

Point was if it has mishaps then it is not a professional grade editing. You don't need to look at what it looked like before.

Mario45 wrote:Photographers years ago, must have been very good if they did not have computers to help them.

Without computers, photos weren't that good. Computers made them better hence digital photography became popular. Highest paid professional photographers also digitally alter their photos. And if computers were available the past, previous pro photographers would have also used computers.

Mario45 wrote:How can you like to be a pro? Being a pro means you earn your living from it, I think, may be you do earn your living from it, but I do not think so if you put your work here for free.

Did I say I was a pro? But a photo was posted from a pro, not sure which one but my guess is it was the photo of Burj Al Arab with pink tint.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:20 pm ---

Mario45 wrote:which shows you have a nice computer.

Having nice computer doesn't mean skills. Lot of people have nice computers these days.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:24 pm ---

Chocoholic wrote:Here's a great example, a friend of mine - professional photographer has this blog: http://www.clearandtransparent.com/blog/

Nice collection there. I like the color and detail changes between before and after photos.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:26 pm ---

Mario45 wrote:It removes any feeling from the photographs and just leaves a manufactured image. There is no life. No feeling.

If you like that kind of photos then you can be the non-digitial photographer. I suppose there is a small community for that.

Yeah he's really great Nuc, and you see it's not huge changes, just slight colour, contrast, shadow and the odd focus alteration. Really good examples of how subtle techniques can enhance the images.

Mario45 , er no! It's a still image from a movie scene - it's the personality of the character she was portraying! You really don't get it, so I'll just bow out now and go bang my head on a wall.

That photo may or not not be edited, I don't know the history of that photo. But when that photo was taken, image editing still happened. So not sure.

Lastly, digital element doesn't replace composition, those are two totally different areas of photography.

Nucleus , It's a still from the film 'The Seven Year Itch' - do a search on google images for MM and virtually every single one has been airbrushed!

If Mario thinks 'original' photographers didn't use tricks, he's incorrect. Soft lighting, soft focus, gobos, coloured filters over lights and lenses were all enhancements. Heck even on final images they had specialists that would 'paint' on them to alter an image.

Mario45 , This is where you are sorely mistaken! It is not 'how' and image is taken or created, it is the 'content' of that image that makes the lasting impression and that comes from the creativity of the person who created it - something which you clearly fail to grasp. Do you think it was the person who took that photo that came up with it? Nope - that would be the director and the director of photography, the stylist, the costume director, the make-up artist. The cameraman was merely the last link in the chain.

Mario45 ,



I had always loved this shot of MM, I totally agree with you M8

Its just the evolving art forms and post production is just a part of it and its present in all media, Ever since there was recording media there is somekind of enhancement and even before that.

Today what ever you see and hear wheter it be in a magazine, sliver screen or even live performances there is post production and enhacements to it, wheter t be digital or analogue. Chocs is in the Radio biz and she can tell you even the live DJ you hear talking his audio signal is going through what is know as a compressor and/or limiter oratleast any radio station worth its salt would be looking boost its signal strenght and limit distortion of over amplification.

And I personaly think if done right it just adds to the listening and viewing experience. Just because you have a DSLR and a copy of Photoshop doesn't make you a good photographer, taste, talent and creativeity cannot be taught. Although I agree specially people starting can go overboard and that just makes even a good shot look awfull ! But done tastefull it make it come alive.

So just poo poo'ing new tech is being old fashioned and unwilling to accept postive change. Not art form would have developed if the artist never stretched their limits. People would be still finger painting on cave walls !

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:56 pm ---

Mario45 , Actually everything was fake about that woman, from her name right down to her hair colour.

Chocoholic wrote: it's not huge changes, just slight colour, contrast, shadow and the odd focus alteration. Really good examples of how subtle techniques can enhance the images.

That sounds easy but it is not that easy. It takes good eye, practice, and experience to fine tune it in the right balance.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:01 pm ---

Mario45 wrote:There is personality in that photograph and it is iconic. How many of the digital images created in your way will be around in 50 or so years? none I think unless you are special.

I said so before, you take a plain woman and make her beautiful with the art of make up but when you remove the paint, all you are left with is one plain and bland woman. Who may be beautiful to some, I will add.

We are on totally different pages. You are talking about composition. As for getting back on the topic, editing happened 50 years ago too, but it was paints, brushes, and pencils.

--- Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:03 pm ---

Well said DDS!

Me too like photo's with personality.


Landing with two finger tips. Awwwwww.



Next stop lunch in Germany.

You see! Much more interesting.

Many questions will not be answered, but one. Photo's are taken with a qtek.

Here is a nice use of lens flare. In Burj Al Arab photo it looks like out of place, whoever did it.

Burj with pink sky is silly
I prefer picture of beautiful woman! Well done Nucleus
I prefer whole body, and the less clothing she wear the better the scenery. You know what I mean? Try it, and dont forget to post it here
Everyone like beautiful woman

Nucleus. Photography has different meanings to different people. I prefer photo's of people. But that is personal. I lack object constancy. It is difficult for me "remembering" emotions I have for people. After not seeing somebody for some time, it is difficult for me to "remember" whether I like that person or not. Photo's of people help me. I get the feelings and emotional history back from looking at a photo. I take photo's of everything to help me. And I look at them later. I have many photo's. For me they are almost life savers. Photo's are essential in my life. So, photo's have different meanings. Sorry to hijack the thread with my photo's. Is that ok?

LOL for IOU!

Nucleus ,Nice shot Specilay the girl!!