Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

rob1234 · 09-11-2011, 02:12 AM

Wandered across this user's Flickr, and love some of his shots. However, he seems to have a common 'look' (high contrast, vivid, sharp, dark) across his photos - can anyone give me any tips on how he might have achieved this? Have been playing with some of my (similar) pictures in Aperture, and just can't get it anywhere near.

Flickr: Wiffsmiff23's Photostream

eg:

Wheatfield · 09-11-2011, 07:23 AM

I suspect that this picture was created more in camera than in post production. It looks a lot like light painting, and quite good light painting at that, combined with some careful colour correction and contrast control in post.
But mostly, this is solid photographic technique, not just playing with sliders on a graphics program.

Ubuntu_user · 09-11-2011, 09:15 AM

Like Wheatfield said, most of what makes his pictures is not the PP, but the image technique. However, to answer your question, I don't think that can totally be done in Aperture. I use aperture almost exclusively, but to get his "look" he probably uses a third party app/plugin.

rob1234 · 09-11-2011, 11:38 AM

Thanks guys! I realise hat it takes a good shot in camera to make these - but there is definitely some good PP in there too.

I disagree with it being light-painting by the way...

hcarvalhoalves · 09-11-2011, 12:08 PM

By the water you can see he's using long exposures, but besides that, there's heavy PP in all of his photos. In the one you posted, I believe he just burned out most of the picture and kept only the highlighted areas visible to give that heavy, contrasty look.

mysticcowboy · 09-11-2011, 07:17 PM

There's definitely light painting. Look at how the light wraps around the outside of the tunnel but not the rest of the wall. The vegatation and the foreground water are illuminated differentially, too. There's also illumination coming from behind the tunnel. Don't know if the PP can be all done in Lightroom, I'd guess Photoshop, but I'd say that the shot is mainly excellent lighting and planning.

One PP possibility is that there's some exposure stacking done with the image, which would allow it to be lit piecemeal. That would take Photoshop or equivalent.

**Ash** · 09-11-2011, 07:48 PM

Good use of curves and contrast in PP helps, but most of the results does look to be created through the use of the exposure triad in camera.

09-11-2011, 02:12 AM	#1
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Post Production technique Wandered across this user's Flickr, and love some of his shots. However, he seems to have a common 'look' (high contrast, vivid, sharp, dark) across his photos - can anyone give me any tips on how he might have achieved this? Have been playing with some of my (similar) pictures in Aperture, and just can't get it anywhere near. Flickr: Wiffsmiff23's Photostream eg:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post production software / wich is the best?	mba1971	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	35	11-08-2009 12:12 AM
Post production question(s)	bluebronco	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	08-06-2009 11:01 PM
What post-production software do you use?	bluebronco	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	08-05-2009 10:10 PM
My Amended Post Production Technique	benjikan	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	4	06-24-2009 03:19 PM
Post production time?	jeremy_c	Photographic Technique	20	12-05-2008 02:31 PM

09-11-2011, 07:23 AM	#2
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	I suspect that this picture was created more in camera than in post production. It looks a lot like light painting, and quite good light painting at that, combined with some careful colour correction and contrast control in post. But mostly, this is solid photographic technique, not just playing with sliders on a graphics program.

09-11-2011, 09:15 AM	#3
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	Like Wheatfield said, most of what makes his pictures is not the PP, but the image technique. However, to answer your question, I don't think that can totally be done in Aperture. I use aperture almost exclusively, but to get his "look" he probably uses a third party app/plugin.

09-11-2011, 11:38 AM	#4
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760 Original Poster	Thanks guys! I realise hat it takes a good shot in camera to make these - but there is definitely some good PP in there too. I disagree with it being light-painting by the way...

09-11-2011, 12:08 PM	#5
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	By the water you can see he's using long exposures, but besides that, there's heavy PP in all of his photos. In the one you posted, I believe he just burned out most of the picture and kept only the highlighted areas visible to give that heavy, contrasty look.

09-11-2011, 07:17 PM	#6
mysticcowboy Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: port townsend, wa Photos: Albums Posts: 968	There's definitely light painting. Look at how the light wraps around the outside of the tunnel but not the rest of the wall. The vegatation and the foreground water are illuminated differentially, too. There's also illumination coming from behind the tunnel. Don't know if the PP can be all done in Lightroom, I'd guess Photoshop, but I'd say that the shot is mainly excellent lighting and planning. One PP possibility is that there's some exposure stacking done with the image, which would allow it to be lit piecemeal. That would take Photoshop or equivalent.

09-11-2011, 07:48 PM	#7
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Good use of curves and contrast in PP helps, but most of the results does look to be created through the use of the exposure triad in camera.

Post Production technique

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!