# John sees everything



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 8, 2007)

but might not particularly like it. 








I posted this about a year ago, but I redid the processing to bring out more detail.


----------



## scyzoryk_o4 (Dec 9, 2007)

hey, this picture is amazing! I would pay to to teach me your photoshop skills..haha good stuff man


----------



## The Phototron (Dec 9, 2007)

How did you "bring out more detail."

Smart Sharpen and High Pass?


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 10, 2007)

The Phototron said:


> How did you "bring out more detail."
> 
> Smart Sharpen and High Pass?


That, and it's an HDR from 3 images which brings in even more data.


----------



## Alpha (Dec 10, 2007)

Forgive me if you think this comment is unneeded, but in my honest opinion, the Dave Hill/Dragan post-processing style is simply a fad.


----------



## ANDS! (Dec 10, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> Forgive me if you think this comment is unneeded, but in my honest opinion, the Dave Hill/Dragan post-processing style is simply a fad.



So is dieting, but that doesn't make it bad for you.

Having said that, I am a definite slut for these types of photos.


----------



## Alpha (Dec 10, 2007)

ANDS! said:


> So is dieting, but that doesn't make it bad for you.
> 
> Having said that, I am a definite slut for these types of photos.



You misunderstand my point. But I'd rather not derail the thread. So...okay.


----------



## Davehimself (Dec 10, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> Forgive me if you think this comment is unneeded, but in my honest opinion, the Dave Hill/Dragan post-processing style is simply a fad.



i agree, i thought i was the only one that thought that


----------



## Alpha (Dec 10, 2007)

Davehimself said:


> i agree, i thought i was the only one that thought that



I suppose I'll bust out my obscene condescension with regard to that one. From what I've seen, people tend to love that effect the first few times they've seen it. After that it gets old rather quickly. People who don't get over it, either through endless attempts to copy it or persistent admiration of it, I think are positively stupid.


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Dec 10, 2007)

I agree that the effect is overused. I mean, I totally thought it was cool Max, at first, but now it's just getting old, repetitive, and ho-hum. The shot isn't bad or anything, but like, you know, it's just another over-processed BW portrait.


----------



## dpolston (Dec 10, 2007)

I think it's a fad too but having that out there, I'd love to know more about how it's done. I have read the post and I've done a little research on it... but I really haven't taken the time.

As an "art form", I think the technique behind it is noteworthy. This is a good shot, for what it is. I'd like similar work in my portfolio. 

Kudos!


----------



## kundalini (Dec 10, 2007)

With or without all the processing, I think it's a good image nonetheless.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 10, 2007)

Thanks for the comments everyone!

I respect your opinions, max, but for clarification, Dave Hill's images are much smoother, and would be impossible without strobes. Every single one of his photographs with his signature look on his website is in color. 

I was not trying to emulate Dave Hill, Joey Lawrence, or anyone for that matter. If I were, it would look more plasticly and would be in color with at least a single key light and would have kickers on each side of him. I recognized the advantages of the HDR process into revealing more detail in landscapes and cityscapes and applied it to portraits. I've never seen an HDR portrait photograph processes similar to what i've done to this extreme. 

This is like selective coloring, some like it, some hate it.


----------



## The Phototron (Dec 10, 2007)

dpolston said:


> As an "art form", I think the technique behind it is noteworthy. This is a good shot, for what it is. I'd like similar work in my portfolio.
> Kudos!


I agree to what you are trying to say. It doesn't have to be a fad, some techniques just draw attention when they are first introduced by their virtue of looking distinct. But overtime as many of you point out, it gets old. So merely using the technique wouldn't be enough anymore, you need a level of mastery over it and at same time make it purposeful for the idea you are trying to convey. 

Techniques are just tools for composition, that say I don't think you should add bad connotation to it just because people have the tendency to use it as a gimmick.


----------



## dpolston (Dec 10, 2007)

Well if Dave Hill is using it as a gimmick, he can go and laugh about it all the way to the bank! Good grief, he's making a killing on his work.

I should be so lucky! I love the look of HDR.


----------



## Alpha (Dec 10, 2007)

Sw1tchFX said:


> Thanks for the comments everyone!
> 
> I respect your opinions, max, but for clarification, Dave Hill's images are much smoother, and would be impossible without strobes. Every single one of his photographs with his signature look on his website is in color.
> 
> ...



You're absolutely right about Hill, and I meant my commentary on the style to be separate from your shot itself, which I think is good. He does indeed require strobes, and does minimal HDR as far as I know. I understand what you're going for now, though I don't quite think you've pulled it off. I have seen similar results from the Dragan process without the use of HDR. Perhaps it is possible for you to truly step-up the effect by combining the existing processing workflow with HDR, but I don't think it's come across quite so extraordinarily here, if you understand what I mean.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 10, 2007)

MaxBloom said:


> You're absolutely right about Hill, and I meant my commentary on the style to be separate from your shot itself, which I think is good. He does indeed require strobes, and does minimal HDR as far as I know. I understand what you're going for now, though I don't quite think you've pulled it off. I have seen similar results from the Dragan process without the use of HDR. Perhaps it is possible for you to truly step-up the effect by combining the existing processing workflow with HDR, but I don't think it's come across quite so extraordinarily here, if you understand what I mean.


I know exactly what you mean about Dragen, and he's just out of this world, amazing portrait artist. 

It still needs a bunch of developing, next month I plan to be able to do more portraits and am defiantly going to work with it more. I know what I can do with it for landscapes, but portraits are different because skin is specular and diffused at the same time.


----------



## Milhouse (Dec 11, 2007)

I like the shot.  I feel like it just jumps out at me.  I would also like to see the original, just for comparison.


----------



## Chiller (Dec 12, 2007)

Diggin this one.  Love the mood you got with this.  :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## RKW3 (Dec 12, 2007)

This PP is very impressive, overused or not. It will look good to any buyers if you plan on selling this print/ prints like this.


----------



## Alpha (Dec 12, 2007)

BTW I don't believe it's sharp enough. The DOF is too shallow, which is slightly blurring his hair/forehead/eyes. Dunno if that's what you intended but it's atypical of the style.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 13, 2007)

Thanks for the comments!

I don't remember if it was intentional or not. All I know is that it was shot at f/8 with my 24-120. I did this almost a year ago :???:


----------



## The Phototron (Dec 13, 2007)

Do you other works you want to post? I haven't seen much from you lately.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 13, 2007)

The Phototron said:


> Do you other works you want to post? I haven't seen much from you lately.


I haven't done hardly any personal work in the last 4 months. Most of what I've done lately is client-based stuff, and I can't show that here without permission. :er:


----------



## JCleveland (Dec 17, 2007)

reminds me of the sabattier effect done in a dark room... fad or no fad, i haven't seen it done enough times to be annoyed by it.. so as of now. i like it =)


----------



## Lorielle99 (Dec 18, 2007)

pretty tight. it looks as if his hands are melting into hsi face.


----------



## myopia (Dec 18, 2007)

it's nice to see this style editing once in a while. personally not my style, but refreshing none the less.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 21, 2007)

Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## nora (Dec 21, 2007)

I like this picture.. its special


----------



## Robstar1619 (Dec 21, 2007)

I think it's pretty cool:thumbup:
I so wish i had your skills on editing pics...i dont own any photoshop software or anything in that class..only the Neat image that i hardly understand at all even though some say it's a very easy to use:blushing:
Anyways i like that pic a lot and belive you have done an excellent job on it.


----------



## Lorielle99 (Dec 21, 2007)

how do you take hdrs of people?


----------



## wasssssup (Dec 22, 2007)

Awesome portrait! The eye is perfectly in focus and is sharp. It really draws you in. His skin and hair add great texture.


----------



## chente922 (Dec 25, 2007)

sorry for the stupid question but why HDR images can't just be consider like another type of photography like landscape, macro, ect. i mean, i like it a lot but a lot of photographers just hate it


----------

