www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Carl Warner's Images
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Carl Warner's Images

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Harold Gough



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5787
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:50 am    Post subject: Carl Warner's Images Reply with quote

There is inspiration here:

http://www.carlwarner.com/warner.html

Click on Fotographics, the second square from the left (orange) on the
Home page.

This might be a bit "arty" for the present forum but it shows what can be done. For the foodscapes he photographs foreground, midground and background separately and combines them by digital manipulation. (Stacking on a grander scale than usual?).

Harold
_________________
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 19980
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is fun stuff! Very Happy

Hardly anything beats a talented artist using "brushes" that paint details by themselves while the artist concentrates on concept and composition.

Danny does some stuff like this. Wonderful images!

And very welcome in this forum, as long as they meet our size criteria.

Among Warner's images, the mushroom "trees" on a landscape of seeds would fit well here. But when a whole head of broccoli or a whole coconut is a small part of the scene, it's too big.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
augusthouse



Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 1195
Location: New South Wales Australia

PostPosted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Harold wrote:

Quote:
This might be a bit "arty" for the present forum but it shows what can be done. For the foodscapes he photographs foreground, midground and background separately and combines them by digital manipulation. (Stacking on a grander scale than usual?).


I assume that Carl Warner is making a composite image using the three shots: foreground, midground and background and using the resulting image(s) as the base for his artwork.

Not so much "stacking on a grander scale", the granduer comes with his working of the image(s) into the final artwork.

Composite Focus improves depth-of-field. If you take a sequence of focus positions (not too many) and combine them.

'The technique involves taking a series of shots, each focused on a different part of the object. In an image-editing program they are then assembled in layers, and the out-of-focus areas of each layer removed with a soft erasing brush.

If the sequence of shots was planned and executed properly, what is left in the composite image is a set of sharp zones that fit together seamlessly. Success is all in the planning, because you cannot afford to have gaps in the sequence, and it is safer to overshoot than risk having a zone that is unsharp.This is not too complicated; but it does take a considerable amount of work.'

I would rather stack 3 images as opposed to making a composite from 3 images.

Stacking software, such as Helicon Focus or CombineZM are designed for just such a purpose and will handle sequences of hundreds of images or just a few. Imagine trying to make a composite out of 100 images manually.

I should post this question elsewhere; but at the current level of development with regard to stacking software - at what point does the pursuit of clarity begin to work against itself? Does stacking software introduce small undesirable 'elements' that at some point are multiplied and amplified by the number of images in a stack? Do we reach a point of one step forward two steps back? On second thoughts I'll re-word and post this question in a new topic.

Craig - with some help from Michael Freeman
_________________
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harold Gough



Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 5787
Location: Reading, Berkshire, England

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

augusthouse wrote:
Harold wrote:

I assume that Carl Warner is making a composite image using the three shots: foreground, midground and background and using the resulting image(s) as the base for his artwork.

Not so much "stacking on a grander scale", the granduer comes with his working of the image(s) into the final artwork.

Composite Focus improves depth-of-field. If you take a sequence of focus positions (not too many) and combine them.

Craig - with some help from Michael Freeman


Correct

Harold
_________________
My images are a medium for sharing some of my experiences: they are not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Macro and Micro Technique and Technical Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group