Balloon Show

Wo, You are new to PN just today! I am flattered you created a new account simply to shit on me. Dude, grow up.

Tom, it was a pleasure....

Just one last point, is this what you call photography? You really think you're so great, you have given 7442 rates with an average of 3.4... You got ONLY 1586 rates... to post critiques like the one that you're making on PN, you should try to evaluate yourself. You have gotten only a 20% of ratings compared to what you have given... Really shitty performance.. Try to expend more time improving the quality of your work, and less time posting shit on this forum, take it as an advice. Enjoy your day,

 

+++ From Tom's web page ++++

This member has rated 7442 photos on this site, with average ratings of 3.45 for Aesthetics and 3.37 for Originality. The ratings went to 2992 distinct photographers. You can browse some of the photos rated highest by this member.

 

Ratings Given 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Originality 23 36 5088 1820 394 73 8 Aesthetics 21 29 4705 2069 520 82 16

 

This member has received 1586 ratings, on 123 distinct photos, averaging 4.96 for Aesthetics, and 4.79 for Originality. The ratings were from 811 other members. You can browse the 76 most frequently-rated photos of this member.

 

Ratings Received 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Originality 0 0 136 545 509 310 86 Aesthetics 0 0 105 443 558 377 103

 

PS- Kelly, I apologize that you got involved on this...

Kelly, don't waiste your time comparing to Tom... I saw your work and is 10 times better than him. I would like to propose to boicot our dear friend from PN, the best way would be to give him the "best" scores... People like that shouldn't be in this forum. Lets make photography a joy, lets make this forum a good place to share our own images with good friends expecting constructive feedbacks.

I see Yinka has trouble with a little piece of (rather direct) real world criticism of his image. That could be expected when your friends constantly heap false praise upon your work. It is however probably one of the 'critiques' that you will remember and hopefully help you improve.

I have absolutely NO problem with criticism. In fact, I welcome it. I have said NOTHING about being criticized. It is the language (rude) and the patronizing jealous insults that I have commented about.

This is a venue for sharing and learning. I put this photo out there for that very reason. I will be the first to admit that it has significant problems, and I was hoping to learn how to improve. I never in my wildest dreams expected it to be number 1. I have certainly taken many more excellent photos, some of which have gotten dismal ratings. Nonetheless, I have not resorted to insulting people whose images got better scores than myself, nor have I told them how MY work was better than theirs, and how they did not deserve to have a number 1.

I am thankful to all the people who voted. After all, their opinions count. And honestly, I do welcome constructive criticism. I have learnt a lot from several constructive comments here. Note that Tom never gave a single constructive comment.

Yinka

I like the composition but I think that the level of color saturation is far too high. If the individual layers were each saved, I would be inclined to do some more work on the colors and the editing technique.

Keith, thanks for the comments. This was really my first photoshop experiment. I realize that my technique still needs a lot of improvement, and I do appreciate your comments.

 

Yinka

Yinka, you persist in referring to your critics as fools, I am sorry but this

is a grossly arrogant attitude. People have very strong views about the

doctoring of images. There is a category specifically aimed at digitally

altered images. Why did you post this in Landscape? I rated it highly before

I realised that it was a fake. I have since ammended my rating, it has NO value

in my opinion. Your portfolio of landscape images is by no means ''up there'' with the best.

David, I do not refer to critics as fools. Actually I genuinely appreciate and value your comments and critiques. There is only one individual here who was insulting. And I will not descend to his level.

It is not my fault that the image was so highly rated. I am here to learn, and I say this in all humility. I have NO problem with people rating this photo badly. If you note, I have not once complained about poor ratings with respect to this image.

What I DO despise is people who insult others. I do NOT claim to be good. What I need is genuine, honest critique that will make me a better photographer and better at photoshop.

This is NOT a fake. I stated clearly in the image information that the balloons were inserted in photoshop. I apologize if anyone missed that. I would NEVER deceive. Quite honestly, I am here to learn and have fun. I am not in competition with anyone, and have no desire to have conflict.

My comments certainly were not directed at you or any other genuine critics. If I have offended you personally, I sincerely apologize.

Best wishes and Peace

 

Yinka

"This is total shit" ....sounds pretty insulting to me. No, you're not insulting Yinka personally, but when you make a dim-witted comment like that, you can come acrosss as insulting and very rude. If you don't like the photo say so and why but don't chastise the person just because others rated it highly. Tom, you're so focused on why this photo was #1 on the TRP and "overrated" that you came across as "fool". Honestly, would have been as harsh as you were if this photo was #300? Why don't you offer constructive critism and not pay so much attention to if a photo is rated higher than you think it should be?

 

.....and spending six hours looking for tulips....dude, get a life.

I was abducted by aliens and when I was released they gave me these transgenic tulips. They were invented by a mad scientist on Mars. Is that the answer you want?

If you can, come spring 2007, go to the Bank of America in New Brunswick, New Jersey. You will find the tulips planted in 3 flower beds there. You can photograph them yourself then.

It is amazing what a deranged brain can come up with, no?

I would not personally use the words that Tom used to describe the photo,

however I understand where he is coming from. It's simply one person's way

of expressing a view, we should not read too much into it and see it as a

personal insult. It is much the same as my opinion which is that as a

Landscape the photograph is worthless because the scene depicted never

happened. As a digital alteration, I guess it has merit 'tho I am not

an expert in doctoring.

 

I would be very much against such images appearing in Landscape on a regular

basis because it belittles the work of honest landscape photographers who

cannot bring themselves to import skies, balloons etc etc to ''enhance'' thier

photographs.

David

 

Thanks for your kind comments. Your comments are polite, instructive, and at the same constructively critical. And, I do appreciate them.

You will note that this is essentially my first posting of this genre. The vast majority of my images have been landscapes. And very few have had any significant manipulation other than autolevels, contrast and some (usually mild) saturation boost. My default posting category is usually landscape, and naturally I put this in that category. I did not put any serious thought into the category I was posting in, nor did I expect it to be rated so highly. I did state quite clearly in the technical section that the balloons were added. There was definitely no attempt to deceive. Ratings mean little to me. I am a physician, just having fun taking photos, and wanting to improve my technqiue. I do not earn a living selling photos, nor do I sell them. So, I have not had digitally manipulated images appearing in the "landscape" category on a regular basis.

 

If you note, Tom did not give any useful critique. Nothing was constructive or helpful. It was just totally insulting. I would have greatly valued his comments if her had said something sensible and constructive, rather that just saying "this is total shit".

We may all have differing opinions about things. Some like Mozart, some Coldplay, some even listen to punk. I feel we should all value and respect other's work, even if we don't agree.

 

Thanks again.

 

Best wishes

 

Yinka

 

 

for the forum thread...free speech ain't it grand!

Hi yinka, funny composite you have here... here is how i would improve it:

 

1. the sky: it is generally a good thing to add a strong degree of perspective to pasted skyes, your presentes some degree of distortion at both sides - so you probably did something - but still looks "far" from the real action. Expecially the clouds on the center have a "pasted" look... if i were to drop in a sky i would choose carefully one that has as less clouds as possible toward the horizon, so the clean sky (and its luminosity) would be the only important thing to adjust to make the composite look more realistic.

 

2. detaching balloons from their original background: i generally use the pen tool in ps, it allows you to create very precise selections through splines, once the mask is ready i make a selection of it, switch to quick mask, and refine the selection furtherly so that there is no selected pixel outside the object i want to paste... this way the alone should be minumum... when pasting the image you can apply some degree of burning on highlight to reduce evidence of alones, or use the rubber tool when necessary...

 

3. realistic balloons: lighting... there is an useful filter in ps to do that, it allows to create directional lights and cast them on the image or on a single layer... this way you can alter the shadows and the direction of light in a way they resemble coherent with the foreground.. i.e - the ball of hay.

 

4. realistic balloons: shape and perspective: use the perspective tool accordingly to the foreground distortion... the balloon on the right is flat but if you look at the grass in foreground it has a precise perspective... you have to compensate accordingly...

 

5. general look of the image... try not to apply too much objects to an image, avoid impossible actions... consider the balloon on the left.. it is clearly taken from below, it is too simple to spot this as a pasted in feature... more balloons into distance, instead, would have been better, would have given you a deeper sense of perspective, probably you could even mask some horizion-sky interaction you dont like... also consider that the foreground has been shoot with a wide angle lens... it is likely that all objects that are not in close foreground are "far" into the frame.

 

this is for the image itself... i would also advise you to post manipulations that are clearly recognizable as such in the "manipulated" forum, generally you get some precise critique from experts in manipulation by posting there... if the manipulation is not evident *at all* then choose the category you like, but remember that there are many photographers - expecially in the landscape category - spend a ***lot*** of time waiting the perfect combination of light, shadows, clouds, and close action... a non perfectly integrated composite, in the wrong category, will mean - at least - lower ratings, if not adverse critiques... go in the "philosophy of fotography" forum, check it out, and see by yourself how many flames go off weekly on the manipulation issue.

 

my valutation about the final image: a nice try, that can be improved by the time... the fact that this is an evident composite detracts from the value of the image itself, but would have been better finished it would have made a very intresting illustration.

 

kindest regards. g.

Wow! Thanks a million! That is the kind of constructive comment I have been looking for! I must honestly admit though that I am a TOTAL Photoshop beginner and until last week had only used PS for levels, contrast and saturation. I only discovered a little of how to use layers last week. And I only really learned how to use the selction tools and cut and paste about 2 weeks agon. So essentially hald of what you have advised, I do not understand (such as splines). However, I am determined to learn, just as I was determined to learn photography. If you note, my first postings were in October last year. It was at that time that I got my first Digital Rebel, and took up photography seriously. And I believe I have earned a lot in that year. I have been lucky to have several photos published, to have had several exhibitionbs (invited), and to even have won Photo of the Month in Digital Photographer magazine.

 

This sky was actually the original sky. I treied to select the whole sky using the magic wand tool and the shift key. Feathering at 2 pixels introduced a dark line at the intersection of the sky and foreground. So I did 2 separate levels, on 2 separate versions of the same image, one for sky and 1 for foreground, and then laid them on top of each other. I then used the eraser, somewhat imprecisely, to erase the upper layer. I suppose I have a lot of learning to do!

 

I was not aware of a good way to soften the borders of the pasted balloons. I am thankful to you and to all those who have given constructive critiques that will help me improve my technique. I am eager to learn.

 

Again, thanks and very best wishes.

 

Yinka

Hey Tom

 

I am a man of peace. I apologize for anything I have said that might have offended you and hope you will forgive me. I am sure you have a lot to teach me, and I would appreciate learning from you.

Let's make peace, okay?

 

Yinka

Hello im new here and i got to say GOOD JOB i would sure like to learn something ,many more things from you.

 

FS

Hey Tom

 

Thanks for your kind comments, and I am glad that we are friends. I truly love your photographs and believe I have a lot to learn from you. I look forward to communicating, and, just so you know, I value your critique and would love you to comment on my photos honestly and critically.

By the way, what kind of music do you play? I am a bit of a musician too!

Very best wishes

Yinka

wonderful colours here ! The composition, though, is a bit cluttered, I might choose a view without the hey . cheers Jana