Ghost

Full credit to Emil Schildt for inspiration, I loved his painting

with light series and thought I would try and use photoshop to try

and create something alone the same lines. I have not come close to

this this guys awesome work but I was happy with the final result.

 

If you want to vote it 1/1 like my last posting then please feel

free as but I would like to understand why and a brief comment on

what is wrong would be very helpful.

 

Thank you for taking the time to view my work.

I love the result here, ... someone really doesn't understand this works MUST be dark .... bu anyway. (I tried with far worst results the same ...)

Thanks for your detailed comment, Tobias. I can at least now understand the points you make a little better - which doesn't mean I agree with on all counts, but that's fine... it happens...:-)

Of course, the painting you linked us to is awesome, but I feel it's a bit like comparing Shakespeare and Steven Spielberg. Meaning that it's not even the same art, and most certainly not the same style and approach AT ALL. Which doesn't mean that Spielberg has no value, I suppose...

As for the legs of the table which went missing, that's exactly what I like about this images. This table is floating above the ground, not ON the ground...

But I have to say that the ghost here and the additin of green are really not an improvement at all to me. Basically, here, all the class I saw in the first one is gone.

Regards.

Mmmm... don't think I'd better go into the obvious symbolism here... Suffice to say the photography and Photoshop work are both superior.

I like this version much better. I can see the dungeon walls, the green mystical figure which was not there before. The main subject is clearer. I rated you photo higher than any other photo.

At the risk of starting something unpleasant, I have to say that I have read Tobias's comments on both photos, and, sorry mate, but you're what we Australians like to call "up yourself". So you don't like the shot and gave it a bad rating, but the "average, uninventive, and amateurish concoction sporting inconsistent perspective, inconsistent illumination, and an awkwardly rotated pose" sort of comment is ridiculous. Put away the thesaurus and make some helpful suggestions and/or criticisms, rather than blubbering. I went to see what sort of photots you have uploaded to the site, and was surprised to see none at all - surely such an accomplished artist as yourself must have something worth showing. Have a look at my photos, Tobias - by my own admission, they're probably not very interesting, and certainly not very artistic, but the reason I come to this site is to try and learn something about photography, not to risk being put down by an overstuffed, arrogant critic who can't back his own words by sharing his own works.

In the thumbnail version I never noticed the ghost. This is a great image. The tones and lighting really set the mood!

I think that Tobias gave a very good and accurate analysis.

 

I don't see why this image can't be compared to classical work and I've always thought that Spielberg almost single handly ruined American narrative cinema.

 

Too much eye candy, we have so far to go, we'd better get moving.

 

Regarding this image, I (as always) appreciate the thought and effort that went into it. I can't be critical of it because there are no obvious flaws, it is either the full completion of the artist's intent or a stepping stone along the way, either way, accolades.

 

I like the use of the light painting to define shape, I see so often here the under utilization of the technique.

 

Congrats, I'll rate it when I figure it all out.

As far as Tobias 'settling down'; hell, I wish everyone would put so much thought and effort into critiquing photos. (He put together a chart of his critiques, what more can you ask for?) Tobias doesn't sugar-coat his critiques - why can't we just get over that fact and move on to making our own critiques?

Now to following my own advice and making my own critique, to me this image just looks too fake. I mean, that you accomplished this through photography and Photoshop is great, but the overall impact to my eyes is lessened by the 'plastic' look of the model's skin, and the floor and walls textured a la "Doom" or "Quake". I do think the 'ghost' either has to be there or not - right now it's in between, it looks like there's some green smoke rising from behind the table, you can't make a figure out of it.

I think this shows a lot of potential, however. Try the 'paint with light' technique more, on different models and experiment to get better results. It seems like maybe you just tried to do and be too many things with this photo. Just my opinion of course, take it as you please.

wooooow.....

A little over the top, maybe, but on the whole - well said, mate!

Very nice picture, though it doesn't look quite real. The pastel colors and smooth detail make it look like an airbrush painting. I'd very much like to know how you created this shot! rb

great lighting and exposure

Well said Michael! By the apparent lack of works submitted by Tobias, it is my view that while Tobias loves to critisize he lacks the courage to take criticism. Sure none of us here propose to be great photographers, perhaps not even good ones. But the difference with us is that we are here to participate and are willing to give it a go. My suggestion is for Tobias to get his act together, go down to the local camera store, buy a camera and start taking some photos.

To me, this bloke sounds like he is all talk.

truely a fine piece of art. it would mean so many different things to each person viewing it. i am sure it evokes strong reations and is not something the average "religious" person could embrace.

A smooth and beautiful piece of art. Very nice post capture work. J.

Good Image

The tonality is terrific. The digital composite also looks good too.

from the life and death of Man...

super

I think that your photo is equally attractive. Well done.

This has a great mythical quality to it.

Well, the females torso is definitely an attention getter. The seductive arch of her back adds good tension to her shear nudity; however, the level of detail between the face and torso is out of balance with rest of the image. Something doesn't seem right with the muscle tone in her legs. Similar to the criticisms pointed out by Tobias, I'm beginning to have problems with the overall perspective. The shadowy voyeuristic reaper thing is weird. The beam of light is refracting off elements in the air that are only the path of the light. Most of The light originates from somewhere above the viewers left eyebrow not the back of the room where the beam suggests. Perhaps the table is being elevated by Harry Houdini who's disquising himself as a reincarnated nefarious pervert. I like the female from the waist up, the rest feels like ad hoc gothic. I'd say lay her on the cold stone floor and forget the distractions of the table, shadowy figure, and artificial beam of light.

really really nice lighting effekt, as if it was painted! How is it done?

 

The composition is classical and flawless, congratulations!

I just the merit of a picture simply on whether I like it or not. I like this. Very nice work.