Photo Retouching - - The demystification of dave hill! let's all help! - Page 20

Mtmm · #**286** 12-10-2007, 07:00 PM

Please shut up already. You act like a child arguing. "You said that I cant fly to moon, but if I had a rocket and a starship....".

Can you read these words coming out from you monitor? When a subject is moving, you CANNOT take several shots without getting an unsharp image(subject). HDR is a combination of a several different exposures and there is a lack between each one.

Lets imagine a jumping model. I want you to tell everybody here how in the hell you can make a HDR photo from that jumping model without getting a crappy blurred model? It seems that you have somekind of a magic trick to it, please feel free to share it with us.

With some kind of a ultra high speed camera shooting thousands of frames/ sec it can be done, but is it relevant in this discussion? No it is definitely not. Even the true master Dave Hill is saying that it is almost impossible.

I feel so retarted to even answer to you right now. Somebody please make it stop!

Quote:

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

Please, lets get back to business and lets stop this stupid arguing.

http://www.bodynet.fi/kuvat/laukku110.jpg

xfx · #**287** 12-10-2007, 08:04 PM

Superkoax:
Thanks. Nothing special, DB and experience in PP. Lighting plays a very impt role also.

Mtmm:
Thanks for appreciating.

transoptic · #**288** 12-10-2007, 08:55 PM

Learn to read.

Once again, I never said it was easy to do HDR portraiture. Just that it was possible. Lots of people do it. Like I suggested, Google it if you must.

A jumping model does not fit into the realm of possibility. You are simply taking an extreme scenario and applying it to your faulty assertion. The fact that you implore other people to back you up on this issue (and their reluctance to do so) proves exactly how founded you are.

I bet you do feel retarded. I would too if I was making the same jackass assertions you were. This is the last time I will respond to any crackpot reply you make. So go ahead and respond with some irrelevantly snarky post. Hopefully a year down the road you will realize your folly.

CJ Swartz · #**289** 12-10-2007, 10:28 PM

Differences of opinion can be explained without personal insults. Flaming is NOT allowed on this website.

Let's get back to technique and helping those interested in learning how to mimic "the Dave Hill look".

zogdart · #**290** 12-11-2007, 10:38 AM

Dave hill doesn't do it with HDR so leave it alone ( he's shooting with flash!).
I know it's possible but not practical. i would not create a look that i can't replicate in all of my photography(that's why is hired in the first place). could you image him asking for a band (tennage) to sit still for 30 sec......common.....plus you kill the spontaneity in the photo.

so how can we get this effect...

Gary Richardson · #**291** 12-11-2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJ Swartz

Differences of opinion can be explained without personal insults. Flaming is NOT allowed on this website.

Let's get back to technique and helping those interested in learning how to mimic "the Dave Hill look".

Thanks CJ.

As has already been said, we do not wish to see this thread degenerate into a name calling session, we are I hope all capable of behaving like adults.

If you have disagreements then keep them civil please. Better still lets get back to topic.

superkoax · #**292** 12-11-2007, 01:05 PM

In the spirit of Dave Hills retouching!!! STOP IT!!!!
yeah! cool down! Just agree to disagree and end it

this forum is about accepting difference as well! I would love to see a HDR portrait! any good sites for that?

xfx · #**293** 12-11-2007, 07:13 PM

U can do PSEUDO HDR in one single image. Just letting u all know.

Mtmm · #**294** 12-11-2007, 07:19 PM

That is true, but true HDR is always true HDR.

domethiuos · #**295** 12-11-2007, 10:29 PM

Ok here’s my attempt at it using a pic from I believe

snook305 · #**296** 12-12-2007, 05:48 AM

I have two things to say..
One is that Dave hill is not doing 50K + shoots.
Most of his lights are cheapo White lightnings.
Most of his Canons look like 20D's and his so called "Primes" are the cheaper primes.
Also his lighting is not that critical and rather "basic" He seem also to do the same lighting all the time.
One or Two rim lights from the side and a softbox for main filled with ringflash. No genius set up there either.
I would say his final product is what makes him and the Photoshop helps enhance his pictures so they look "Cool"
I would not campare him to a David LaChapelle for instance who did everything on Film and very little retouching.
Obviously from watching his backstage stuff , they are a bunch of talented "hill" billies..:+} No Pun intended.
Also for the people posting, Ahh I did this in Just 5 minutes.. Well great. Now take 2 minutes to explain your 5 minute process..
That is what this Forum is about.. sharing your technique.. Not hosting your images. That goes in another forum.
Also Dave's Look is nothing new. It is actually a good copy of Ficus and Jillgreenberg who had there names WAY before Hill did..:+}
He just applied it to a quirky Rock Band side that not many have done.
Snook
PS. I do not think Dave Hill will ever be a well known photographer and will not last very long unless he plays his cards right.
He'll probably end up like a forum guru like Andre Dragan who until this day is copied in Forums but probably is still that starving artist in Poland!

Mtmm · #**297** 12-12-2007, 06:00 AM

Dave is using Canon 5D full frame, not 20D. And that is for fun, for serious shots he uses Hasselblad.

And Jim Fiscus is not even close, Dave is on the other level what comes to retouching and lighting

superkoax · #**298** 12-12-2007, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mtmm

Dave is using Canon 5D full frame, not 20D. And that is for fun, for serious shots he uses Hasselblad.

And Jim Fiscus is not even close, Dave is on the other level what comes to retouching and lighting

second that! there is more to Dave hill then we ever will know! why did he take photos of Chris Brown? he's one of the most popular artist in the us today! Starving artist? They don't all have to work for high profile to do good! Dragan is one of the most discussed artist in 2006 and maybe 2007...But don not think he's starving! If so he has a PHD in physiscs or something to look back on

But Dave hill, his style is way better then Jill! Fiscus is a good contender, but still I like dave more!

Sistere · #**299** 12-13-2007, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superkoax

Dragan is one of the most discussed artist in 2006 and maybe 2007...But don not think he's starving! If so he has a PHD in physiscs or something to look back on

Yep. In fact, just to throw this out there...I know someone, very well, who contacted Dragan and offered him $10K to show him his technique via emailed PSD. Offered non disclosure contract and everything.

This was after Dragan stopped selling his workflow for $300. And, in Poland $10K goes a long, long way. We are relocating to Prague in April, and I have checked money exchange. Dragan turned him down flat.

Dragan stated that he doesn't even like shooting photos and spends up to a month working 1 image in photoshop.

So, starving...I think he is not. Rich? Not likely...not by what Americans think of as rich. But the guy ain't digging under his couch cushions for sausage money either.

Damien

superkoax · #**300** 12-13-2007, 03:11 AM

Sistere: I remember his old site! Before the flash site came along, he wrote that he would give tutoring via email and he would show picture by picture on how to do his style...back then I wasn't very interested in his style, but the style grew on me...fast...but then it was too late!

BTW: Does anybody know if Dave Hill is a member here? Maybe we should write a invite to get him in here? hehe...And maybe he could just show us a small fraction, so we could just feed our brains...becasue I'm hungry and little info goes a loooong way for me