[QUOTE=Alex9325;16656147]I still use CS3, I feel it has everything I need for the moment. What new things are in CS4 anyways?[/QUOTE]
You can draw on 3d models, and various other things. Nothing you can't live without.
I just quite prefer CS4's interface over the previous.
lol I fell in love with Split Toning
[IMG]http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o117/Bobachna/DSC_0063.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Alex9325;16656147]I still use CS3, I feel it has everything I need for the moment. What new things are in CS4 anyways?[/QUOTE]
The only really useful thing in CS4 is the Content-Aware scale and Graphic support (so that when you zoom out it's always smooth, not pixel fucked).
Content-Aware scale makes your image scale so that it drags out the parts with least details in order to try and keep the whole thing in real-size just with more environment.
Say you have a sunset on the beach, but it's a bit too square for you. By using the Content-Aware scale it will only drag out the sky and beach without touching the sun.
I think an image example would be better, hold on.
Ok, so you have this nice image of yourself with the mountain in the background, but damn. It's square. And no way in hell are you going to Clone tool in 400 new pixels in width or what?
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/lang31.jpg[/img]
Well fuck yeah, Content-Aware Scale. Just edit some of the stretched parts so they look nice and it's done.
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/LiXd03.jpg[/img]
As you can see my sweater was dragged out weirdly, but that is because it mistook it for snow as it is white and doesn't have much details, nothing we can't clone away, or even better, just put the old picture over and remove all of it except that part and it's good again.
[img]http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/994/choiniosioniss.jpg[/img]
a free commission i did for a friend.. perspectives/proportions a bit off/stylized, i know.. spent 40 mins on it.. was in a rush.. anyways, thought it looked nice..
I like to mess with perspective
[IMG]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b294/toxicpiano/DSC_0845.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b294/toxicpiano/DSC_0845-Edit.jpg[/IMG]
(also known as I wish I could afford a perspective control lens)
[QUOTE=skam;16674606][img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2457/3817035611_b4835ba0c4.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
For some reason my first thought was Nanosuit.
Nice use of the side light to underline the muscles.
How about we start posting in the Custom Forums thing so Hezzy notices us and gives us a Forum so we can mess around without having to watch "LOL CHECK IT OUT I DRAWED DIS IN 5 SECONDS ON THE TOILET" threads?
Just stay out of the MS Paint section.
just got my EF-S 55-250mm, and the first thing i do is go outside and take this.
[img]http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/8673/flowermacro.jpg[/img]
full zoom, approx 5 feet away. it's not technically a macro, and macro's are very cliche, i know this, i just wanted to test it out.
also just a note, the vignetting came out darker than it was when i was doing the minor raw edits i was doing in the raw window, what the fuck. (CS4)
[editline]10:17AM[/editline]
well actually i got it yesterday but had no time to really take anything
[QUOTE=Adbor;16666086]lol I fell in love with Split Toning
[IMG]http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o117/Bobachna/DSC_0063.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Sry adbor unless you're actually going for the hipster photographer look that effect is unacceptable.
[B]Leafy Sunset[/B]
[img]http://fc00.deviantart.com/fs48/i/2009/225/f/3/Leafy_Sunset_by_Cussypat.jpg[/img]
What do you think?
[QUOTE=Perfumly;16695743]Sry adbor unless you're actually going for the hipster photographer look that effect is unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
executed well it's a great effect
Which is vary rarely done
for example, if he decided to go all the way and did it so that it came out like this: it'd look much better.
[img]http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/2153/postulx.jpg[/img]
here's the difference if you can't tell.
[img]http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/7615/postt.gif[/img]
[editline]11:11AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Perfumly;16696162]Which is vary rarely done[/QUOTE]
very true.
also, another thing that helps, something i didn't do, is up the contrast a bit, and give it a bit of that noir look
[editline]11:13AM[/editline]
in movies like Sin City and Schindler's List, it's done excellently, but with use of greenscreenish techniques.
That was an awesome effect in schindlers list
also, a note, that image appears to be flat, as well. are you just using a standard cam?
What do you mean by "standard"
[editline]09:33PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Perfumly;16695743]Sry adbor unless you're actually going for the hipster photographer look that effect is unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
:saddowns:
as in just an average digital camera
[editline]12:48PM[/editline]
not an SLR/DSLR/Hybrid SLR
Hey guys. I'm gona go take "Space" pictures today, Have any tips? (D40)
[QUOTE=M_B;16697716]as in just an average digital camera
[editline]12:48PM[/editline]
not an SLR/DSLR/Hybrid SLR[/QUOTE]
DSLR - Nikon D60.
:flaccid:
[editline]10:30PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=booster;16698467]Hey guys. I'm gona go take "Space" pictures today, Have any tips? (D40)[/QUOTE]
"Space" as in nightsky?
Use very long exposure times - BULB mode is your friend tonight. It helps to have a tripod/something steady and the [item that holds your trigger for you for a long time, rope-shaped, forgot the name].
[QUOTE=booster;16698467]Hey guys. I'm gona go take "Space" pictures today, Have any tips? (D40)[/QUOTE]
[I]today?[/I] do you mean tonight?
[editline]02:16PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Adbor;16698515]"Space" as in nightsky?
Use very long exposure times - BULB mode is your friend tonight. It helps to have a tripod/something steady and the [item that holds your trigger for you for a long time, rope-shaped, forgot the name].[/QUOTE]
if you do this, it'll get a spinny look. have a wide exposure, but a low ISO, the exposure time shouldn't be more than one second, unless you want that spinning, circular stars look. take RAWs, and then mess around with the exposure and brightness with photoshop.
[QUOTE=Adbor;16698515]DSLR - Nikon D60.
:flaccid:[/QUOTE]What kind of lens are you using? it looks so flat and depth less, but there's not a load of distance, so you should be able to see SOME depth.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;16695743]Sry adbor unless you're actually going for the hipster photographer look that effect is unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. If you do it right it can look fine.
And I traveled the rubble strewn streets, the roads without names, until my shoes were tattered and my feet bloody. The warm, rich wind blows dust across the depleted society, rousing the murderers from their shopping carts and blinding the poor...
And the sky wept to see such atrocities, cities burned in the scathing flame of the people, putting torch to the frail times of old and letting rein all forms of obscenity.
I'm in an interesting mood tonight. Gotta stop listening to Godspeed You! Black Emperor.
[QUOTE=M_B;16699387]
What kind of lens are you using? it looks so flat and depth less, but there's not a load of distance, so you should be able to see SOME depth.[/QUOTE]
kit lens :saddowns:
I'm going to Lietuva for 10 days and I'll probably be cut of any internets. I'll try to bring pretty pictures.
To the photographers in here, how do you usually get such a crisp focus?
(not trolling)
Also, contributing:
[IMG]http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a379/aaronnoraa/landonandclair172.jpg[/IMG]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
