Photo-Based Art - - Misc: What's funny about Photo-art...

chiquitita · #1 09-09-2002, 04:58 PM

I was thinking about photo-based art the other day and how, as a traditional artist, my style was to make a drawing or painting look as realistic as possible - like a photo, and now digitally so many people, including myself, strive to create art from photos. That just struck me as interesting.

DannyRaphael · #2 09-12-2002, 12:19 PM

C...

Your observation falls into the same ballbark as those who apply techniques and/or filters to recently taken photos in order to make them look like they've been in a steamer trunk in the attic for the past 50 years.

Go figure!

DJ Dubovsky · #3 09-13-2002, 11:58 AM

Oh that's so funny. You're not the only one who's thought the same way. I took up airbrushing because I like how you could get a more realistic looking image than with bristle brush. Now, I'm trying to make photos look painted as well. And Danny is right too on how we now strive to make photos look old and tattered. What's the matter with us?

DJ

Ed_L · #4 09-13-2002, 09:58 PM

A woman has the right to change her mind. But I'm not sure about a man.

Ed

Bob Cronin · #5 09-14-2002, 01:37 PM

I recall seeing a tv show (TLC channel?) about the history of the printing press. It said that the Italic typestyle was one of the first ones used, because it represented the printed hand strokes well.

The lesson was that any newly introduced technology is first used to simulate the technology it is to replace or improve upon. Maybe this applies here? Bob

G. Couch · #6 09-14-2002, 01:48 PM

Bob - Ecxellent point! Another example would be when photography first became popular. Images often had hand painted areas in order to simulate the look of oil portraits. I have a few tintypes like this.

dcarr · #7 09-14-2002, 02:15 PM

I think we like the ability to manipulate. We want to put our mark on something. For me, sometimes I see a photo a took and now think of ways it could have been better. Other times I prefer an older look to a newer subject. It satisfies our playful side and gives us a different perspective. Now I often photograph children in b/w just to get that formal look back.
Debbie

Leah · #8 09-20-2002, 02:28 PM

I think I've just come across the ultimate in this.

After scores of articles suggesting how to get an aged, weathered, sepia look to an (actually modern) image, today I came across an article telling you how to flatten the contrast, tweak the reds towards magenta and tweak the blues towards cyan in order to produce an image that looks like it's one of those faded and discoloured photos from the 1950s that we spend so much time tweaking in the Restoration challenges!

Now I've seen everything...

Leah

dcarr · #9 09-20-2002, 06:46 PM

To add to our amazement, ImageEnhancer plugin comes with a filter called cheap camera. It does just what you described.
Debbie

DannyRaphael · #10 09-20-2002, 07:21 PM

Debbie:

RE: " Now I often photograph children in b/w just to get that formal look back."

Are you using film or digital?

While more times than not I prefer b/w over color for kid pix, I still shoot (35mm) color and use the various PS methods to convert to grayscale. Having color available for the entire image or selective digital application, to me, is ultimate flexibility.

Are you able to get results in native b/w that you're not able to get via digital means? (So there's no misinterpretation, I not tryin' to blast you here... Just curious, thinking I might learn something.)

BTW: Here's the best / most affordable ($20) plugin for making pictures look like they've taken a lot of abuse.

Have to admit it looks pretty suspicious when used on a pic of a couple teenagers with misc. body piercings and a 2002 Honda in the background!

Old Photo plugin.

~DannyR~

dcarr · #11 09-20-2002, 07:52 PM

Hi Danny,
When I get to photograph children. I sometimes use both. My digital has a b/w setting, but sometimes the lighting just doesn't transfer right in the photo. So then I PS it.
With film, I get to shoot faster. My digital is older and doesn't have that capability. This gives me more shots, especially with little kids who are always changing facial expressions.

Mostly I;ve just been experimenting a lot with the different choices. I do use a lot of color, mostly digital, because the children look so beautiful. Then I play a lot. For b/w I prefer film, for color I can go both ways.
The best thing about the whole deal is Photoshop. I can enhance anything I want and get the look.
Debbie

dcarr · #12 09-20-2002, 07:57 PM

Just looked at the plugin you listed Danny. Amazing how we can now add just the right amount of dirt to any photo!! I used to just roll my photos around in the mud.
Seriously though, nostalgia plays a big part in all these plugins and techniques mentioned in this thread. We like to go back to simpler times once in a while. I guess that's why those old cutouts where you can place your head on an old time picture are so popular. You rarely see any intergalactic ones, right?
Debbie

DannyRaphael · #13 09-21-2002, 03:57 AM

Debbie:

Being fully entrenched in the 35mm world, the digital considerations make perfect sense (now), especially the memory savings of BW over color.

I appreciate you flipping on a couple light switches for me.

RE: "intergalactic cutouts" - rare
Yep...Extremely rare = potential business opportunity?
Probably NOT.

RE: Aging prints with a little heel action.
Just had a thought: If you ever develop a commercial "age your photos here" plugin, you could call it "Digital Mud." That's got a ring to it don't you think?

- - - - - - - - - -

O.K., here's an attempt to reel this conversation that I got off track back into the center lane...

After a couple hours of trying this and that, tweaking here and there, I'll smile at the final result. Then I'll turn on the original image for comparison purposes.

More times than not I find myself asking: "Why would anyone want to muck up this perfectly good picture, anyway?" to which I invariably answer, "Because I can?"

~DannyR~