2001 Space Frog

well why not . . . . ?

Good concept, nicely executed.

I dont believe this is an actual frog. I believe this to be a reflection or reproduction of a reflection of a frog.

 

did you ps the background or is it in camera?

 

Knicki

It says unmanipulated. (are you pulling my leg?)

Cant I have any fun with you Carl?

Excellent detail with a unique perspective here. (The sugarcoated part is done). I'm not so sure the uneven lighting helps this in any significant way. Perhaps if the entire image was bright and colorful, it might even be considered aesthetically excellent. Still even as is, this is very good work Carl. Aloha!

Vincent, Where do you want more light? Are you put off by the dark feet or the black background (or both?)

 

Um, are you seriously suggesting that bright colors are an appropriate prerequisite for high aesthetics ratings? You're pulling my leg, too, right?

 

Knicki, fun, is OK, good, even. But I can't tell yet how you read this image.

The left side of the image Carl is darker than the right side. You can actually see the suction on his feet on the right, not on the left. I assumed that was by choice. The clarity in the somewhat tricky capture is excellent. However, I believe a more uniform lighting here would make the entire image even better. And if he had an insect in his mouth perhaps even a 7. Heh...

The lighting comes from the right side, as you've noted. There's also a secondary light source from the front left, but it could have been stronger to bring out his feet a bit more. I got off about a half dozen shots before he moved too close to the . . . . (I ain't tellin' yet. :-))

 

They don't have insects in outer space, so yes, that would surely have beeen a 7.

I've been staring, looking, veiwing at this little frog for a while now and I still dont know what I think. Obviously it has good detail and is different perspective wise than I would normally think of with a frog. I have to agree with a space fly it would have been a 7 at least.

 

Knicki

How do you think I got this shot? Is he free standing? Why is the background black if it isn't PS? What is the light source(s)? Does the coloration look right to you?

 

(For putting you through all this, I'm going to owe you a couple critiques and at least one clever line, aren't I?)

a couple critques and at least 2 clever lines and they better be good too.

 

let me stare a bit more at the underbelly of this fine frog.

 

if I guess wrong please know that half my face is numb from novacaine and well I cant be responsible for anything typed or said due to facial numbness.

 

 

it's climbed onto a peice of glass. I'm going with house window (happened to me once). I've been trying to figure out the casting of the light. Not too bright, kinda dimmed? what it is I havent got a clue.

 

or ?? I'm going to have to just blame it on facial numbness.

Well, since you say there was no photoshop regarding the background, I am stumped.

 

After looking it over again, I think I actually might like the fading lighting. perhaps if you simply brightened the entire scene while keeping the same proportions, it might be even better yet. So where was he headed? Whats the deal with this space froggy. And please tell us, if there are no insects in outerspace, what does he live on?? We are anticipating a few answers Mr. Root!

 

PS- Sorry Knicki. did you get dentures??

If you look at it LARGE, there is no problem with the light. Personally, I like low-key images. This play of light spots and the legs fading, disappearing in the dark looks appealing. Interesting contrast between gold and black. Really nice color solution.

Vincent- was only a wisdom tooth but stilll...claiming facial numbness. 3 shots to numb the blasted thing.

 

So CARL?

Thank you Vlad. I fussed with levels a bit, but even though it's exposed one stop under, I like it where it is as well. I wanted to make sure that the night sky was a true black and that his bright underbelly was more of a midtone.

 

He's stuck to a 2X6 pane of glass next to the front door. I gave my wife (who spotted the thing first) a red spot light after setting up the tripod. I opened the door and used the much brighter spot without a color filter for side lighting to bring out the texture. A little spotting to clean up the glass, crop to square, and we're done.

 

Oh yes, set monitor brightness and contrast to 100.

ah I got one right. I kept thinking porch light because of the tint but then he/she would have had to been really high up on your window.

 

Knicki

I don't get it. I thought you said this was taken in space....

 

Nice details Carl. Thanks for sharing. A nice assist goes to the wife!

New point of wiv of frong! Very interesting and funny! Thank you for you comment! Adrj

Knicki, the color temperature is the same, so full points.

 

Vincent, (where do I start . . . ) You're too literal. The title and the bug remark refer to an impression you might have when viewing this image. I could have called it "frog-under-glass" but he doesn't really look all that apetizing. And for the literal minded, he's not really "under" glass, is he? Adriana sees the humor in this. I hope you did, too.

Carl, Thanks for enlightening us on your technique for photographing this frog. I was willing to lay money that you simply placed him on your flatbed & hit 'Scan'. Hmmmmm........Best, LM.

Yes I too was playing Carl. Sorry if I sounded literal. I really did not believe to took this in outer space! ...did you??

 

I think LM might be on to something though. Lay Mr Froggy down and hit SCAN!

I don't have much experience with a flat bed. Don't you have to slam the cover over the subject to keep it flat? . . . . . . . . . :-)

Carl, I find placing a standard building brick on top is enough pressure. No sense overdoing it. Should hold a frog in place nicely. Best, LM.