Printable View
Here is an example of the sepia aging photo technique. Frankly it doesn't rock for me which is why I don't do it. :) You will notice lots of "grain" as well. To be picky with my own pic, I should have probably cloned out the parking lines and perhaps the vegetation in front of the door
Tegan
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...oldphoto-1.jpg
I think it somewhat suffers the same problems as tiredirons recent attempt. I'm not quite sure I can put my finger on why, but I'm not fooled. It could be the structure is too modern for the vehicle or the parking lines as you suggested. It could be that he parking lot is paved. It could be the corner to corner sharpness of the image.
Aging an image is truly a tough task. Most end up looking like sharp images with degradation added. Maybe the starting point should be a basic jpeg with a crummy lens and shallow depth of field. I dunno.
"Sepia" is also one of those colours that's hard to define. It's like saying 'red' (dark red - light red - cherry red - firetruck red).
The tone in this image is not the tone of sepia that i like or print. I prefer a much darker and browner sepia similar to what I used to get when i actually toned prints sepia.That actual tone varied with the type of paper, and length of bleaching time , but it was always browner and richer. My preferred tone of sepia is similar to this sepia from wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sepia_(color)
Also sepia doesn't always work well with every image but in my opinion it does work with this image. I just think it would look nicer if the sepia was darker and browner. My critique on this image has nothing to do with the sepia.
I like this image and I like the composition here. The image needs a serious contrast boost globally and especially in all the foliage. It's not the sepia that is stopping this image from 'rocking', it's the contrast ;)
It seems obvious that sepia is simply not to your taste, that's cool but it seems personal. What did sepia ever do to you? :D
Actually the structure is from the same era as the car and paving was done in the same era as well. Interesting comment about sharpness since it was done with a 5 megapixel pocket camera. Also don't forget that twin lens reflex and other quality and large format cameras have been around for a very long time too.
But then all your comments rather prove my initial view. Is it really worth the effort and who really wants a crummy old looking photo up on their wall?
Tegan
Never mind the weeds, parking-lot stripes or paving, the 185-70-15s on 60 spoke rims kill it at as far as that goes, however I think the question is, are we trying to make images which people will actually believe to be old, or are we simply trying to create something in that style? My fort image was not one with which I ever though I could fool people, rather I wanted a treatment which was more appropriate to the scene (in my mind) than a modern, sharp, full-colour image. I think both of these images acheived that aim.
The lack of contrast is on purpose since that is what happens when an image fades over time. I will provide a darker sepia one for your comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by marko
Tegan
A 5 meg pix pocket camera still will still produce a sharp image in broad daylight such as this.... and judging from your fickle style of technology research I'm pretty sure your 5meg pocket camera is a good one...:)Quote:
Originally Posted by tegan
OK here is the browner sepia with more contrast as requested by Marko.
Tegan
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/b...agedphoto3.jpg
Hi tegan,
I believe you've given me permission to try my edits in the past... Feel free to ask me to delete this if I've misunderstood - no problem.
This is kind of how I'd play with this image - This represents 4 minutes of play. I'd probably need another 10 min more.
Comments?
thx
m
Quote:
Originally Posted by tegan
I prefer this one..........