Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Magazine like shots

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 5:49:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine shots". The
quality was superb and the photos almost looked like they had been painted
because of the finish. I wondered how this affect was achieved as I think
they were done in PS. Does anybody know what I am talking about and if so,
how is it done?

More about : magazine shots

Anonymous
May 16, 2005 6:41:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:D 6a8d1$112$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine shots". The
>quality was superb and the photos almost looked like they had been painted
>because of the finish. I wondered how this affect was achieved as I think
>they were done in PS. Does anybody know what I am talking about and if so,
>how is it done?


I mean an effect like this
http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg
>
>
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> writes:
> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:

>> I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine
>> shots". The quality was superb and the photos almost looked like
>> they had been painted because of the finish. I wondered how this
>> affect was achieved as I think they were done in PS. Does anybody
>> know what I am talking about and if so, how is it done?

> I mean an effect like this
> http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg

Either plenty of studio lighting with huge softboxes and seamless
white background; or he uses a large light tent lit up by outside
strobes on all sides.

He may have cloned away some of the background detail with Phoptoshop,
but the soft, even illumination in the shot you link to is only doable
with a light modifiers such as softboxes or tents.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related resources
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle+news@ifi.uio.no> wrote in message
news:q564xjrzmt.fsf@kuusi.ifi.uio.no...
> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> writes:
>> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine
>>> shots". The quality was superb and the photos almost looked like
>>> they had been painted because of the finish. I wondered how this
>>> affect was achieved as I think they were done in PS. Does anybody
>>> know what I am talking about and if so, how is it done?
>
>> I mean an effect like this
>> http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg
>
> Either plenty of studio lighting with huge softboxes and seamless
> white background; or he uses a large light tent lit up by outside
> strobes on all sides.
>
> He may have cloned away some of the background detail with Phoptoshop,
> but the soft, even illumination in the shot you link to is only doable
> with a light modifiers such as softboxes or tents.
> --
> - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

There must be a program that can create that kind of finish. The photos I
saw were actually on a CD and they were straight forward digital shots taken
during the wedding service, in the church. I have tried everything on PS but
can't get anything like it. Maybe he used PaintShop Pro. I'm not familiar
with that program and I'm wondering does it have a selection of "special
effects"
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> writes:
>> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine
>>> shots". The quality was superb and the photos almost looked like
>>> they had been painted because of the finish. I wondered how this
>>> affect was achieved as I think they were done in PS. Does anybody
>>> know what I am talking about and if so, how is it done?
>
>> I mean an effect like this
>> http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg
>
> Either plenty of studio lighting with huge softboxes and seamless
> white background; or he uses a large light tent lit up by outside
> strobes on all sides.
>
> He may have cloned away some of the background detail with
> Phoptoshop,
> but the soft, even illumination in the shot you link to is only
> doable
> with a light modifiers such as softboxes or tents.

Always better to do the quality work as close to the origin as
possible, true; however, some migration from more extemporaneous shots
toward the "studio" look _can_ be accomplished in photo manipulation
programs. Seems to me there are recipes for that kind of work
clustered around "glamour" as a search word.

--
Frank S

"Verbing wierds language."
-Calvin
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

honest joe wrote:

> "Gisle Hannemyr" <gisle+news@ifi.uio.no> wrote in message
> news:q564xjrzmt.fsf@kuusi.ifi.uio.no...
>
>>"honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> writes:
>>
>>>"honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine
>>>>shots". The quality was superb and the photos almost looked like
>>>>they had been painted because of the finish. I wondered how this
>>>>affect was achieved as I think they were done in PS. Does anybody
>>>>know what I am talking about and if so, how is it done?
>>
>>>I mean an effect like this
>>>http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg
>>
>>Either plenty of studio lighting with huge softboxes and seamless
>>white background; or he uses a large light tent lit up by outside
>>strobes on all sides.
>>
>>He may have cloned away some of the background detail with Phoptoshop,
>>but the soft, even illumination in the shot you link to is only doable
>>with a light modifiers such as softboxes or tents.
>>--
>>- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> There must be a program that can create that kind of finish. The photos I
> saw were actually on a CD and they were straight forward digital shots taken
> during the wedding service, in the church. I have tried everything on PS but
> can't get anything like it. Maybe he used PaintShop Pro. I'm not familiar
> with that program and I'm wondering does it have a selection of "special
> effects"


Probably he had a great fast lens to use available light instead of
artificial looking flash. I agree your example has fancy studio lighting
and that's what distinguishes it (though the palm of her hand is blown out.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Frank ess" <frank@fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
news:sM2dnZlx7917KxXfRVn-gg@giganews.com...
> Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> writes:
>>> "honest joe" <honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> I saw wedding photos last year and they looked like "magazine
>>>> shots". The quality was superb and the photos almost looked like
>>>> they had been painted because of the finish. I wondered how this
>>>> affect was achieved as I think they were done in PS. Does anybody
>>>> know what I am talking about and if so, how is it done?
>>
>>> I mean an effect like this
>>> http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg
>>
>> Either plenty of studio lighting with huge softboxes and seamless
>> white background; or he uses a large light tent lit up by outside
>> strobes on all sides.
>>
>> He may have cloned away some of the background detail with Phoptoshop,
>> but the soft, even illumination in the shot you link to is only doable
>> with a light modifiers such as softboxes or tents.
>
> Always better to do the quality work as close to the origin as possible,
> true; however, some migration from more extemporaneous shots toward the
> "studio" look _can_ be accomplished in photo manipulation programs. Seems
> to me there are recipes for that kind of work clustered around "glamour"
> as a search word.
>
> --
> Frank S
>
> "Verbing wierds language."
> -Calvin

Thanks guys. I'll keep on lookin'
>
Anonymous
May 16, 2005 8:53:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 16 May 2005 15:00:56 +0000 (UTC), "honest joe"
<honestjoe@home.com.invalid> wrote:


(Referring to http://www.digitalwilly.com/donna/dglasses.jpg)

>There must be a program that can create that kind of finish. The photos I
>saw were actually on a CD and they were straight forward digital shots taken
>during the wedding service, in the church. I have tried everything on PS but
>can't get anything like it. Maybe he used PaintShop Pro. I'm not familiar
>with that program and I'm wondering does it have a selection of "special
>effects"

Without seeing the original, it's difficult to determine how much of
that was done in photoshop, but, some or all was....

(I'll say photoshop, as this is the most likely choice - some of what
I am about to describe can be done in PS/PSPro and some maybe can't).

What's 'magazine' about this shot? It's high-key (in that the
background has been overexposed to the point it disappears), high
contrast (in that the image still retains the full dynamic range of
the screen/paper) and is highly saturated (the colors are deeper and
richer than you'd usually expect).

Also the drop shadow effects on the frame are a bit different, but are
easy to do in any software.

Without you explaining more, I can't tell which aspect appeals to you
as being 'magazine' quality...

High-key would usually require the photographer to ensure that the
background is lit & exposed a couple of stops higher than the subject.
Much easier to get this right when taking the photo - of course,
photoshop *can do anything*, and one is to simulate this in
post-production.

Generally, take any bright background photo and using levels or
curves, crop all the bright side of the histogram to push it high key.
If he didn't start with a high-key-background, a rubber-band selection
mask with some edge gausian-blur softening could be used to stop the
model from being over-exposed.

The high contrast was probably helped with a curves adjustment, and
possibly even a duplicated layer in 'overlay' mode, turned down to
about 30% or so.

And with any digital image, unsharp mask or similar to enhance it's
definition and make it pop out of the page.

If the model's face looks somewhat plastic on inspection, it's quite
possible that a filter such as Kodak's GEM airbrush filter or similar
has been applied.

Info here:
http://www.asf.com/products/plugins/airpro/pluginAIRPRO...

Saturation was probably pumped separately too.

Couple of tutorials on high key (they used B&W, but this isn't a
requirement):
http://www.ephotozine.com/techniques/viewtechnique.cfm?...
http://www.graficalicus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name...

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga
!