Abbey Street C&C EDITED ;p

superflyninja

cheers

edited version

bovril

It's Abbey Street.

It's a little over saturated for my liking and also a bit dark esp the person crossing the track. There is detail lost there. There also seems to be a lot going on in it.

Skittle

What post processing was done to get that colour effect?

superflyninja

oooooh sorry yeah Abbey street.silly me....sigh...Im getitng really frustrated my my laptop. its much brighter on the screen there.any body know about monitor calibration?
yeah there is a lot going on....which is what I wanted for a pic taken at rush hour!!


I used the the cross process curve preset in cs3 for the colour(with my own tweaks)

TelePaul

There seems to be a green tint to it. Also a tad underexposed?

superflyninja

TelePaul wrote: »

There seems to be a green tint to it. Also a tad underexposed?

the green tint was intentional.I was duplicating a style I had seen in a geography book i used back in secondary school!!! I think Im going to stop posting c&c her euntil I use my monitor with the correct colour space/gamma whatever...

AnCatDubh

I quite like it - including the x-processing. Its bordering on the urban acid style. I like the rich saturation and the (suitable) depth of darkness which in my opinion works really well. The only criticism that i would offer is the sky - it just looks unnatural what ever the cross processing has done to it. I'd suggest that you would need to selectively colour correct and give it a deep blue treatment.

Cheers.

RichyX

As mentioned above it's an overly busy image.

One thing I find strange is that almost everyone & everything (cars, people) in the photo are heading towards the camera. Gives a bit of an odd feeling to it.

AnimalRights

As some posters said earlier its over saturated and underexposed.
I do quite like the way its extremely busy though and I find the Luas overhead cables add a lot to it.

TelePaul

superflyninja wrote: »

the green tint was intentional.I was duplicating a style I had seen in a geography book i used back in secondary school!!! I think Im going to stop posting c&c her euntil I use my monitor with the correct colour space/gamma whatever...

Actually, it does remind me of secondary school textbooks! Not sure if that's a good thing though.

Cabaal

TelePaul wrote: »

Actually, it does remind me of secondary school textbooks! Not sure if that's a good thing though.

same here, weird!

superflyninja

Cabaal wrote: »

same here, weird!

thne I have succeeded!!!! though as has been mentioned maybe that aint such a great thing to succeed at...... ;p

rahtkennades

Cheap 1980's printing techniques seem to have scarred us for life! I reckon it looks like a school book as well!
I like it for it's business as well. As a photo that was headed "Rush Hour" I think it works well. If it had been posted up without any explanation, I would have dismissed it as over-processed and lacking in any clarity, focus or proper theme.

I guess that's a great example of why some photos are less without some explanation!

Fair play, even though I'm shuddering at the reminder of geography books!:eek:

Masada

I think it looks good., its "different",

Creamy Goodness

i like it, but what would have made it better - which is out of your control - would be them triangular flags coming down from the building on the left to the pole.

they catch my eye too much and distract me from everything else in the image.

AnimalRights

The edited version certainly looks different and better overall on a positive side although on the negative side the overhead Luas wires look much thinner and the picture doesn't look as busy!

superflyninja

AnimalRights wrote: »

The edited version certainly looks different and better overall on a positive side although on the negative side the overhead Luas wires look much thinner and the picture doesn't look as busy!

*tears hair out* GGGAAAAHH I cant win!!! lol cheer s for the feedback all!!!!!

smelltheglove

In my opinion it does what you wanted it to do, you wanted an 80's text book style photo and that is what you got so you have successful shot. It may not be photographicaly perfect but it doesnt need to be.

I think you did well getting what you aimed for and that is all that matters, bula bus.

DadaKopf

smelltheglove wrote: »

In my opinion it does what you wanted it to do, you wanted an 80's text book style photo and that is what you got so you have successful shot. It may not be photographicaly perfect but it doesnt need to be.

I think you did well getting what you aimed for and that is all that matters, bula bus.

Yep, I'd agree with this. I was instantly gratified by your other B&W photo, but this one isn't so stunning in its own right. It's not a great photo, but its not an awful photo. But to look more 'nineteen-eighties', I think you have to boost the exposure and lighten the shadows some more. Again, depends what you're going for, but underexposure of shadows and overexposure of highlights is associated with cross-processing, not super-saturated 1970s/1980s transparencies used in more primitive printing presses. And, even in the 1970s, there was a move towards more muted films with a slightly blue cast (e.g. Ektachrome).

DeVore

I prefer the edited version and I kinda like it but I'm not sure why and I'm certainly not sure why I'm looking at it (in the sense of ... eh, yeah, its abbey street chock full of traffic and people, like always ).

I think this is one picture that would benefit from context like being in a school book for example or in a piece about congestion charges etc.

DeV.

superflyninja

DeVore wrote: »

I prefer the edited version and I kinda like it but I'm not sure why and I'm certainly not sure why I'm looking at it (in the sense of ... eh, yeah, its abbey street chock full of traffic and people, like always ).

I think this is one picture that would benefit from context like being in a school book for example or in a piece about congestion charges etc.

DeV.

heheheh well i got sick of taking pictures of flowers!!!!!

superflyninja

DadaKopf wrote: »

Yep, I'd agree with this. I was instantly gratified by your other B&W photo, but this one isn't so stunning in its own right. It's not a great photo, but its not an awful photo. But to look more 'nineteen-eighties', I think you have to boost the exposure and lighten the shadows some more. Again, depends what you're going for, but underexposure of shadows and overexposure of highlights is associated with cross-processing, not super-saturated 1970s/1980s transparencies used in more primitive printing presses. And, even in the 1970s, there was a move towards more muted films with a slightly blue cast (e.g. Ektachrome).

the first imaging did have cross process curve preset run on it! but i wasnt going for authentic reproduction.the picture wasnt worth it, i was working fomr a vague moemory which said " an urban pciture with a green tint,just like that cross process prest.arr"
thanks for the comments on the bw pic