Creative Portraits: Niki

[DannyRaphael]

We'll use this thread to launch the new forum.

Objective: Turn this into a painting, sketch or watercolor.

~Danny~

[DannyRaphael]

Here's the base image...

[Jeff L]

I thought I could come up with something for this beautiful model....

1. I used Flaming Pear "Glare" and faded a bit.
2. I followed up with a "Gothic Glow" and faded that layer a bit.

This may be one of those things that appear really cool on my monitor but don't really work. Lemme know!

[DannyRaphael]

Wayne:

Sorry I'm a little slow to reply: I'm on 'jury duty.'

You're in the right place and you've got the right idea. Including the client's name on the print is a unique touch that I believe would be an attractive (and easy to apply) option.

- - - - - - -

Jeff:

Without feedback from a "real client," it's hard to get a feel for what works and what doesn't just by viewing a manipulated image on the monitor.

My approach is to strive for a look/result that's different enough/appealing enough that a potential client would consider purchasing it in addition to (or in lieu of) an original shot. I've actually printed up some variations (as samples) for client review. (If they buy one or two, fine; if not, I've keep them for future marketing samples.)

Since not many folks offer this type of thing at this time as far as I can tell, it's going to take time to get a feel for what works and what doesn't. Since I'm just beginning to do this myself I'm finding that my hunches on what I think "look good" and might sell are often very different than what appeals to a given client.

~Danny~

[Leah]

Originally Posted by DannyRaphael

Since I'm just beginning to do this myself I'm finding that my hunches on what I think "look good" and might sell are often very different than what appeals to a given client.

Jumping ahead here, but when you've been doing it a while longer I'd be very interested in your considered opinions on what does and doesn't appeal to clients versus what you thought would appeal going in to the venture.

[ahutton]

I tried a pencil sketch on this one.

Two images (I always find it easier to make individual images of each effect, rather than layers. Just personal taste.)

One buzzed, sent to PMArtGallery for hand drawing, buzzed again, greyscaled, darkend contrast.

The other, buzzed, impressionist pencil sketch crosshatch softened smudges with 100% brush. Then made the lips and nose darker.

Merged together and redid the background on the left to cover up nasty jpeg artifacts.

AmyHutton

[Jeff L]

That could be a tough one Danny. One thing that comes to mind is the old little league templates but that is pretty standard.

I printed a 4x6 of the one I posted and it looked pretty cool, even if it was just printed on a HP Photosmart 1000.

I'm thinking that with portrait manipulation you are looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack but one way to present them without losing your margins would be to print up a "contact sheet" of 3x5's with the different versions, or maybe have some test portraits in a portfolio for customers to view. You could speed things up a bit by creating a "flavor of the month" action folder for the manipulations. This could turn into a real nice marketing angle for you to say the least!

Best 'o Luck man!

[Henk Bos]

Just new and experimenting.

[DannyRaphael]

Well, I'd say you can experiment all you like. Wonderful interpretation. I especially like the unique edge treatment.

Welcome and I hope we'll see more of your inspiring work in the future.

~Danny~

[lglogan]

It's been a long time since my last post. Hopefully I haven't lost my touch. Here is my try.

[DannyRaphael]

Hey, stranger... Nice you see you. I see you haven't lost one ounce of your touch.

Hope you'll be able to play for awhile. Your creativity has been missed -- and is always a joy to see.

Welcome back.

~Danny~

[Andrew B.]

One of my standard methods. Use a combination of too much noise reduction and too much sharpening. Too much noise reduction simplifies, taking away the photographic look. Too much sharpening makes steep ramps in the local contrast. Then take several results, pick out which ones seem to contribute something, and mask the best parts together. Then touch up with smudge tool.

[DannyRaphael]

Wow. That's a very, VERY nice effect, Andrew. What method(s) are you using for the noise reduction?

[Duv]

Very nice renditions everyone! I tried to keep mine simple.
Cropped to place the eyes as close to 1/3 as possible.
Ran 3 levels of Stylize: Diffuse: Anisotropic
Unmask Sharp: 200/32
Xero: Mood Light
Image: Adjustments:Selective Color: Red: increase Magenta slightly
Stylize: Diffuse: Anisotropic
Texturizer: Sandstone: 52% 3
(After most effects, erased back the eyes to keep them clear.)

Cheers
Dave

[Andrew B.]

Originally Posted by DannyRaphael

Wow. That's a very, VERY nice effect, Andrew. What method(s) are you using for the noise reduction?

I use Smart Blur, but not the one in Photoshop. I use Photo-Paint's smart blur because it is much smarter. The rest are plugins set way too high. Sometimes I run them twice. They include Alien Skin Image Doctor Jpeg Repair, Focal Blade Selective Blur Pro, and Digital Gem. And if you see the pattern here, these are all edge protecting blur tools. And this gives the simplified surfaces.

But you also need strong edges. So I oversharpen along the simplified edges. And there is only one sharpener that can handle this technique, and that's Focal Blade. It is the only one with enough power and enough control to pull this off.