# Roger



## Black_Square (Aug 3, 2017)

This is Roger.

I'm afraid I don't know much more about this chap as the event of taking the picture was over with very quickly. He did take time to combe his hair, and if you look closely at the top left of his head you can see the combe marks. He said he would email me in due course, so I'll learn more about him then. In the meantime I like to think he has royal blood - he just has that look.

Post processed to create a painterly effect.







Thanks for looking


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 3, 2017)

He has a great look!


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 3, 2017)

Nice, exquisite.  He looks like he may be a fisherman.... or a college professor


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 3, 2017)

Another wonderful portrait from you.


----------



## BrentC (Aug 3, 2017)

Another fantastic portrait from you, both your skill and the people you pick.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 3, 2017)

absolutely fantastic


----------



## tirediron (Aug 3, 2017)

Lovely image; great lighting and perfect exposure & tonal range.  My only thought is that his face position and beard, combined with your shooting position make the beard much larger relative to the upper part of his head and eye area.


----------



## Gary A. (Aug 3, 2017)

I echo all the above.  Well done. A Brit straight out of Central Casting.


----------



## Braineack (Aug 4, 2017)

not to be despairing, but 3 threes stand out to me: 1. the hue is very green. 2. he's sitting a bit forward in the frame, i wish there was more space in front of him than behind. 3. again, you did something odd to his eyes, that to me, screams overly post-processed.


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 4, 2017)

Braineack said:


> not to be despairing, but 3 threes stand out to me: 1. the hue is very green. 2. he's sitting a bit forward in the frame, i wish there was more space in front of him than behind. 3. again, you did something odd to his eyes, that to me, screams overly post-processed.


This really is an excellent example of a classical, Renaissance portrait style. He clearly has a regime of lighting and post processing. I can see his vision, nothing modern about the render. He has stripped away common ideals of what portrait Photography has become. He has bent the render into what inspires him, this is an exceptional image IMO.


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 4, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> He has a great look!



I agree!



jcdeboever said:


> Nice, exquisite.  He looks like he may be a fisherman.... or a college professor



He's very photogenic and could fill many roles - a spy also springs to mind 



Dean_Gretsch said:


> Another wonderful portrait from you.



Thanks you.



BrentC said:


> Another fantastic portrait from you, both your skill and the people you pick.



Thanks Brent - very kind.



pixmedic said:


> absolutely fantastic



thanks!



tirediron said:


> Lovely image; great lighting and perfect exposure & tonal range.  My only thought is that his face position and beard, combined with your shooting position make the beard much larger relative to the upper part of his head and eye area.



I must admit that my shooting angle was a little constrained, so that did have an effect on the proportions of the face. It's only slight and I think I got away with it (sshh!).



Braineack said:


> not to be despairing, but 3 threes stand out to me: 1. the hue is very green. 2. he's sitting a bit forward in the frame, i wish there was more space in front of him than behind. 3. again, you did something odd to his eyes, that to me, screams overly post-processed.



Sorry Braineack, I disagree three times - see jcdeboever's response below ;-)



jcdeboever said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > not to be despairing, but 3 threes stand out to me: 1. the hue is very green. 2. he's sitting a bit forward in the frame, i wish there was more space in front of him than behind. 3. again, you did something odd to his eyes, that to me, screams overly post-processed.
> ...



jcdeboever - you understand! Thank you for your wonderful comment


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 4, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > not to be despairing, but 3 threes stand out to me: 1. the hue is very green. 2. he's sitting a bit forward in the frame, i wish there was more space in front of him than behind. 3. again, you did something odd to his eyes, that to me, screams overly post-processed.
> ...



What was old is now new again. Well said JC. I really like seeing people break out of that cookie cutter mentality and be creative and true to what THEY like and admire. Caving in to other people's styles is nothing more than pandering to egos. Be yourself @Black_Square because you have a true artistic gift.


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> He has stripped away common ideals of what portrait Photography has become.


----------



## Braineack (Aug 4, 2017)

green is the new WB.


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 4, 2017)

Man, I wish I had the rights to some of Rembrandt's masterpieces so I could post them as an example.


----------



## Braineack (Aug 4, 2017)

I've seen a Rembrandt or two before.   They aren't green, and the eyes don't look like someone pushed the shadow slider to 1,000 -- many have eyes almost completely black.








there is an ongoing trend to push eyes to unrealistic levels, which looks fake and unnatural -- since of course, its faked and unnatural.


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 4, 2017)

I must need to calibrate my monitor because I see nothing you are saying in his photo. Thanks for alerting me to that.


----------



## Braineack (Aug 4, 2017)

I mean, sample his shirt.  the RGB values are around 63,77,54





even the beard:






the iris on the far eye is brighter than the near,  but it my mind wants to see it slightly darker.   It doesn't read as natural -- plus I know the effects of editing the eyes too far.


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 4, 2017)

For me, the main focal point is the subject's face. I believe the OP has intentionally used lighting techniques to draw our eye to the man's face. The color of the clothing does not detract at all for me. The lighting sets a very specific mood and if this particular photo was done with an Apple app, I would like the outcome no less. Diversity is good.


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> ..example of a classical,..has stripped away common ideals ..


Two opposing concepts.

What are you trying to say?

O.K., I get that you like it, but can you say why you like it?  What are its redeeming qualities?


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2017)

Dean_Gretsch said:


> ..you have a true artistic gift.


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 4, 2017)

Designer said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > ..example of a classical,..has stripped away common ideals ..
> ...



I said it. He had a Renaissance inspired vision for the portrait. Tonal value, clarity, composition to name a few.


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> I said it. He had a Renaissance inspired vision for the portrait. Tonal value, clarity, composition to name a few.


O.K., then why did you write this:  "_He has stripped away common ideals of what portrait Photography has become._" ?


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 4, 2017)

Designer said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I said it. He had a Renaissance inspired vision for the portrait. Tonal value, clarity, composition to name a few.
> ...


Many of the current , established, portrait photographers are not presenting in a classical, Renaissance style. I appreciate the style, and find it interesting that an artist would assimilate this in 2017 through photography. I don't know anything about post processing but I would assume he is working in multiple layers. If I were to recreate this photograph through painting, I would start with a yellow oxide ground coat and apply multiple layers of oil to build tonal value, using a simple pallet of earth tone color and a small amounts of complimentary color.


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 4, 2017)

Nice to see that once again my image is stimulating debate - always good 

@Braineack  - I'm not trying to recreate a rembrandt so the link to the rembrabdt image is irrelevant. I also deliberately colour tone my images, which also makes white balance  irrelevant. I recreated your little demonstration with the principal element of the image - the face. As you can see, the tones are orange/brown which is exactly what i was trying to achieve. So, no green colour cast.

Given that I have deliberately toned the image to achieve my desired aesthetic outcome, what difference does it make if that tone is green, blue or pink? I appreciate that you may not like the colour tone, an opinion you're entitled to, but ultimately that is irrelevant, as the image wasn't created to your aesthetic taste but mine.


----------



## Dean_Gretsch (Aug 4, 2017)

Now that the " gentlemanly " discussion has slowed, I wanted to inform you that I nominated this photo for Photo of the Month here Photo of the Month - August 2017 Nominations.

I appreciate your effort and honestly would rather fill an empty space on a wall with something that pleases my taste than something sterile and " perfect " that does nothing for me.


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 5, 2017)

Delightfully Unsettling Portrait Photos Inspired by Renaissance Portraiture


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 5, 2017)

I've found that most of the really good artists on TPF have developed a predominant "style", be it tone, lighting, pose, familiarity whatever. I'm thankful that folks like @Black_Square put their work up for review, as the knowledge the neophytes like myself can gain is huge.


----------



## Braineack (Aug 5, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> Delightfully Unsettling Portrait Photos Inspired by Renaissance Portraiture



None of those are green, nor have eyes that are borderline glowing.


also notice how you guys can't handle the simplest of criticism?  full of dismissive & arrogant replies.

I never said I didn't like the photo.  I said three things:

1. the hue is very green.
2. the framing is a little off.
3. the post-processing on the eyes reads unnatural to me.

Point out one place where i said anything negative about the style/atheistic, or I didn't like the photo. That has nothing to do with anything.  My monitor calibration also isn't a problem, so that point is irrelevant.


----------



## terri (Aug 5, 2017)

Braineack said:


> me giving wanking gesture with my hand.


Well, that gesture, plus the fact you have expanded on it here, seems dismissive all by itself.  

Of course, you are welcome and encouraged to offer critique, and the OP has acknowledged it in kind.  It doesn't mean that the image is going to be tweaked to match it, and it doesn't mean that the other comments have no merit, either.

I'm looking at the image on my phone and can't see the green cast you're talking about, either - so it may in fact have more to do with your end.  We all know that viewing images online is only as good as our monitors make it.   Building an argument around color cast is risky in that regard.

Let's keep the comments solely on the image, and dispense with inflammatory posts, please.  

Carry on!


----------



## Braineack (Aug 5, 2017)

for clarity, the gesture was in response to the "my opinion is irrelevant" comment.  I could have gone with :eyesrolling:

But reading it again, i do believe black_square said it quite diplomatically and i may have taken more offense than should.


----------



## Designer (Aug 5, 2017)

terri said:


> I'm looking at the image on my phone and can't see the green cast you're talking about, either - so it may in fact have more to do with your end.


I see the green cast as well.  

I also see the off-balance framing and un-naturally bright irises.  

If all that translates to the photographer's "personal style", then no more needs be said.

However, if some poster wants to claim it is somehow "classic", then we have an issue.


----------



## Peeb (Aug 5, 2017)

I see the hue as a bit "off" but I think it is fantastic.  I really like it.  If you pull the green/magenta slider away from the green, you would get more 'accurate' -  but less interesting.

I'm not nuanced to see anything overly cooked about the eyes, but if they are- they still look fine to me.

I apprecciated Braineack's initial candid analysis- he clearly gave it some careful thought, and although I see technical merit in his concerns, I've re-examined the image and none of them bother me, personally.  I'm not saying Braineack was wrong (he was quite observant, actually), I just don't think that Black-square was wrong either.

My two cents:  Great shot!

PS- and what a great community we have here at TPF!


----------



## terri (Aug 5, 2017)

Designer said:


> However, if some poster wants to claim it is somehow "classic", then we have an issue.



See, I find "issue" way too strong a word for what's being discussed.   A counter point, another opinion, sure (and who cares?), but "issue" is what makes people's hackles stir and goes beyond being useful.  



Braineack said:


> But reading it again, i do believe black_square said it quite diplomatically and i may have taken more offense than should.



Such a nice boy.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 5, 2017)

I read this then printed it, so that I can keep it handy. Guidelines for the Critic and the person being Criticized  Constructive Criticism some good advice for both.


----------



## Designer (Aug 5, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> I read this then printed it, so that I can keep it handy. Guidelines for the Critic and the person being Criticized  Constructive Criticism some good advice for both.


I appreciate that you took the time to find and post that site, but would it be more relevant to this thread if it had more to do with critiquing photographs rather than behaviors?

There have been threads on that topic on here before, so if anyone would happen somehow to be interested in reading further, one could, with one or two well-chosen keywords find one or more of those threads.


----------



## Peeb (Aug 5, 2017)

Designer said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> > I read this then printed it, so that I can keep it handy. Guidelines for the Critic and the person being Criticized  Constructive Criticism some good advice for both.
> ...


New thread about constructive criticism?  Great idea!  
The Art of Photographic Critique (a.k.a. constructive criticism)


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 5, 2017)

Right here's a little response to help clarify my post processing technique and general approach.

The majority of my portrait work is inspired by various classical painters - principally Theodore Gericault, although i appreciate the work of other artists from the period as well. I draw inspiration from these painters and i challenge myself to create a painterly aesthetic to my work. I do not try to recreate classical paintings, as given the different medium such an exercise would be futile. I simply try and blur the lines between a painting and a photo, although the latter will ultimate be apparent. Without reverting to crude photoshop filters this exercise is difficult to achieve, and one that i do not proclaim to have mastered, or indeed had success with - i just share the results.

My portraits are subject to extensive post processing, with one element of my workflow focusing on colour toning. In some instance the final image will be a significant shift from the original, other times to a lesser extent. It ultimately depends upon what I consider is appropriate. I do not claim to create an authentic photographic representation of the subject, instead a re-rendering in a form that i consider is aesthetically pleasing.

In this thread I have had multiple people questioning and have been ultimately critical of an alleged green colour cast. If there is a colour cast, then it is there because I have deliberately created it, so these people are just stating the obvious. If you were viewing a black and white image, would you comment along the lines of 'aha - that image has been deliberately de-saturated' - probably not.

For those who are interested  in the colour toning of the image, it is as follows:

The lower part of the image is green, the face which is the main focus of the image is brown/gold and the background blue/brown/gold. So to clarify, there is no green colour cast. If  you want to play around with the colour picker as others have to prove otherwise then feel free to, although i'd suggest using the colour histogram for a better idea of overall colour composition. If you do the latter you will see that the overall tone is yellow. However, this is all irrelevant - the tone of the image is what it is and is of my making.

One individual has used the word 'zombie' when describing this image, and also suggested that I am an arrogant wanker (posts have been deleted - you know who you are). People are entitled to their opinions, even when they are as crass as this. Ultimately, if you like the image, then great. If you don't, then that's okay too. At the end of  the day you can't please everyone, so I just try and make images that I am satisfied with, something that I am yet to do.

Thanks,


----------



## jcdeboever (Aug 6, 2017)

Black_Square said:


> Right here's a little response to help clarify my post processing technique and general approach.
> 
> The majority of my portrait work is inspired by various classical painters - principally Theodore Gericault, although i appreciate the work of other artists from the period as well. I draw inspiration from these painters and i challenge myself to create a painterly aesthetic to my work. I do not try to recreate classical paintings, as given the different medium such an exercise would be futile. I simply try and blur the lines between a painting and a photo, although the latter will ultimate be apparent. Without reverting to crude photoshop filters this exercise is difficult to achieve, and one that i do not proclaim to have mastered, or indeed had success with - i just share the results.
> 
> ...


I had a strong inkling that you were inspired by the pioneer of the romantic movement, Gericault. I almost mentioned him but some of the comments made me question doing so. I am so thrilled that I noticed this and then you mentioned him. 

I was a self taught artist back in the day and he was one of great interest to me when I was a lad. My first mentor was a professional copy artist and he actually laid out his pallet for me, explaining / teaching how to rob color pallets. He was very helpful and took a liking to me, we are still friends to this day. He is in his 80's. 

He was very encouraging for me to put away the brushes and pic up a camera as I had great trepidation in doing so. Painting was no longer fun for me, reasons unknown. He said the danger in all of the displeasure was not to create. So his guidance into photography seemed logical at the time and more clear today.


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 7, 2017)

Your intuition proved right! I just love gericault's back story, especially with portraits. All very macabre, visiting asylums, hospitals etc, a darkness that he captured so exquisitely in his paintings. 

I do intend to take up painting, but I'm conscious that I don't want to bite off more than I can chew. Although my photoshop work is naturally taking me in that direction. 

Thanks


----------



## DanOstergren (Aug 9, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> I've found that most of the really good artists on TPF have developed a predominant "style", be it tone, lighting, pose, familiarity whatever. I'm thankful that folks like @Black_Square put their work up for review, as the knowledge the neophytes like myself can gain is huge.


These artists always have an ever changing style. Their lighting changes, as well as their toning, posing, etc. I attribute a lot of my improvement to the feedback that I was at times way too stubborn to listen to on this forum. Clearly @Braineack isn't trolling or being abusive and is actually taking the time to give valuable constructive feedback (in comparison to members who are complete jackasses about the way they give critique). You would think that might be seen as a good thing considering most comments on this site are just compliments that don't really help anyone. If we see something to be critical of, it's valuable for more than just the artist who created to piece to speak up about it rather than not, or just saying good job. Calling someone's conductive feedback "irrelevant" seems a bit unnecessary. Black _ Square gave me a critique on the orange skin color in my most recent thread, yet I would never respond by saying his opinion was irrelevant. In fact I was open to changing it, and I think he should be too. The skin looks way too orange in this photo to me. 

Sent from my SCH-I535 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 9, 2017)

DanOstergren said:


> , it's valuable for more than just the artist who created to piece to speak up about it rather than not, or just saying good job



So true. I'm obviously not even in the same league as you guys, but I post a lot of my shots so that I can get feedback to learn. There have been occasions where I've received critical comments from someone only to find the poster who made those comments doing the same thing. For me I sometimes find it easier to "know" what to do then to do it in practice. That's why I think  it's important for those at all skill levels to post their work as it adds credence to their comments, and establishes a benchmark for further learning by those of us less skilled.


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 9, 2017)

DanOstergren said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> > I've found that most of the really good artists on TPF have developed a predominant "style", be it tone, lighting, pose, familiarity whatever. I'm thankful that folks like @Black_Square put their work up for review, as the knowledge the neophytes like myself can gain is huge.
> ...



As I previously explained, I deliberately colour toned this image to look the way it did. It was not my intention to create an accurate representation of the subject - I very rarely do. Braineack went to great lengths (colour picker screen shot ffs) to demonstrate some apparent colour cast. My response is that going to those extremes is irrelevant, given that i am confirming that there is a delibrate colour cast, which I created in Photoshop. @Braineack in subsequent posts compared my image to a 'zombie' and also called me a wanker. These comments have since been deleted so you may not have seen them. That to my mind is being abusive, plain and simple and when you're forced to revert to that language you have lost the debate and more importantly credibility.

When I commented on the orange tones on your photo, that was in the context of you wanting  to create an authentic portrait - to my eye it didn't appear authentic, thus my comment. Given that I am not trying to create an authentic portrait, the fact that you don't like the orange tones in my image (I'm glad you said orange and not green!) is duly noted, but ultimately irrelevant to me as it is ultimately a subjective issue. I like the orange tones, you don't like the orange tones - that's all there is to it. I could very easilly correct the orange/green whatever tone it is, to make it more appealing to the person who critiqued the colour, but then I would be creating an image for them, and not me. 

I really dont mind people critiquing my images - as I have said before, you cant please everybody, only try and please yourself.


----------



## DanOstergren (Aug 9, 2017)

Black_Square said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> > smoke665 said:
> ...


Right, but if you don't mind it then why would you reply by telling them their opinion is irrelevant? That basically says the opposite of that notion, and is incredibly dismissive of the fact that someone took the time to give you valuable feedback. A few years ago braineack made the exact same zombie critique on one of my best portraits. At first I refused to listen because I was so proud of the portrait, and was very rudely dismissive of his feedback (and probably deserved to be called a wanker for it). Later on down the road I took his advice and re edited the shot before entering it into a state wide competition and won four awards including best portrait and presidents choice. Im grateful for his feedback even though my pride wouldn't let me hear it at the time because I thought my artistic eye was better tuned than his critical eye. Im not saying we have to change every aspect of our work to please others, but allowing their opinions to carry some weight can really help you improve because you're no God with a camera, and neither are we. You may be too blind to your own work in order to see points that need improvement, and I'm only saying this from personal experience of being too arrogant to hear what others are saying. 

Also I agree that there is no good reason for name calling in this forum, on any occasion, but don't forget that just the other week you were calling someone else here an idiot for misunderstanding you. 
Sent from my SCH-I535 using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 10, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> > , it's valuable for more than just the artist who created to piece to speak up about it rather than not, or just saying good job
> ...



@smoke665 when shooting portraits, I always think that the best way to approach the shot is to have a clear idea as to how you want the finished image to look. Then beforehand you can use what you'know' to inform your shoot, or alternatively fill the blanks by asking others. Easier said than done though!


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 10, 2017)

@Destin - thanks for the acknowledgements - appreciated


----------



## Black_Square (Aug 11, 2017)

DanOstergren said:


> Black_Square said:
> 
> 
> > DanOstergren said:
> ...



I'm not sure why my response to this post was deleted, along with other posts made by other individuals. Regardless, here is my response again.

I have no interst in debating this issue with you further. I have already explained at great length my position on this matter, and do not intend to repeat myself again. Read what I have stated previously, and if there is anything that you do not understand or want to discuss further with me then message me.

The thread which you refer to at the end of your post is this one:

Homeless Tony 

If you take the time to read it carefully you will see that I did not call anybody an idiot, although I was probably entitled to. Again, if you don't understand something from that thread, or want to discuss things further with me then message me.

It's clear that admin are getting pi$$ed with this pointless saga so I am not responding further to anyone else about issues that do not relate to my original photograph. Let's just keep it about the photography - please.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 12, 2017)

If a post is deleted by a mod, perhaps re-posting the same thing isnt the best idea. 
if your not sure _*why*_ a post was deleted, either PM  a moderator or you can report a post in the thread and that report is seen by all moderators. 

I may be to blame for some of the confusion. I deleted several posts and subsequent quoted posts, but I _*thought*_ i had posted a response afterwards explaining what was going on. aparantly it did not go through on my phone for some reason and my shift got too busy for me to go back and check things until I got home this morning. 

anyway, if everyone could please keep things on track and civil from here on out we would appreciate it.


----------



## Black_Square (Sep 13, 2017)

Very humbled to be notified that my image was voted picture of the month. Thanks for all the feedback guys, even you @Braineack ;-)


----------



## Donde (Sep 13, 2017)

Really, really well done. Wow!


----------



## Black_Square (Sep 22, 2017)

Donde said:


> Really, really well done. Wow!



Thanks Donde, much appreciated.


----------

