dragan effect, dave hill effect and any more?

 

 

<p>hello, recently i learned how to imitate the high contrast dragan effect through photoshop. im not sure if the high contrast/sharpness is achievable w/o photoshop, maybe with harsh lighting.. (someone maybe comment on that)<br />1) well, i was just wondering if grungy effect is the same as the dragan effect.<br />2) are there any other effects people like to make the picture more dramatic or look different? i also learned the tilt/shift one as well as adding rain to the picture. anything else ppl find good to be in one's repertoire? i find that adding an effect can make a bland pic interesting and an interesting pic great!<br />3) in the following pic, is this just rain effect combined with the dave hill effect? if that is the case, how does one make the droplet bounce?<br /><a rel="nofollow" href="

 

 

 

 

<p><a rel="nofollow" href=" />i also really liked this one... how does one do that? he wont answer!</p>

 

 

<p><a name="pagebottom"></a></p>

 

<p>I used to carry a spray bottle of a water with Glycerin in it to simulate dew and rain on subjects like flowers and spiderwebs.</p>

<p>are u serious? for zach's photos, im pretty sure they are fake.<br>

i think for the second link, most of it is natural lighting but there is something weird about the water and the colors...</p>

<p>Oh I am serious.. Using sprays and lighting is a staple of all photographers.. I used to spray models with al kinds of fake sweat and welll You would not understand what we used post Photoshop... I have to say I even fake spiderwebs... :) Ohh children of little faith..</p>

so what do u think about the second link? what happend there

<p>Same thing.. just used lighting and printing to do the PS effect.. PS just mimics what we used to do in darkroom printing... We shot and adjusted in the dark in those days.... LOL</p>

<p> The thing is We can't forget our roots as they are though not set in stone a Dry dark room still has to have a shot to work with.. Fake sweat was just as good we just did what we did and throw a lot of paper in the trash... We took time and stayed pissed off... The thing is We can't ever go wrong doing what we do we can though start wrong and take forever to correct it... No I say Fake sweat ...</p>

<p>Second one: Looks heavily modified, but without the artists input we can only guess. For starters:<br>

Fake water (water with a touch of glycerin perhaps).<br>

Postwork, it appears the artist used a layer mask (s) and brushed in a blur effect, much the way vignettes are used. Another approach is to use a layer mask and go heavy on Luminance noise reduction for a similar smoothing effect.<br>

As noted, it appears that saturation levels were tweaked. <br>

The eyes look over sharpened and brightened a bit too... I'm fairly sure there is even more to it than these "adjustments". <br>

It's not uncommon for people to guard their methods as quite often it takes a lot of time and effort to develop a particular look or method. </p>

<p>Hello, well here is her response. I believed everything except the custom actions how she made it sound like it was nothing. I can believe the 1.4 w/o using any blur and i agree with you on the eye part. But doesnt the color seem off? You think it was water and glycerin, i thought that just give u sweat and not big droplets like that...</p>

<p>Hi,<br /><br />Thank you for your interest in my work.<br /><br />I actually did very limited processing on that image. It was taken in the shower, with natural light. I used my 50mm 1.4 so that is why there is such nice depth of field - no tilt shif used. <br /><br />I adjusted the curves and levels, and then just ran one of my custom actions over the top to 'pop' the photo - no extra sharpening.<br /><br />Hope this helps.<br /><br />Michelle</p>

<p>welll what do u think</p>