I was just playing with the "Digital Orton Effect" (more info here: http://www.pdpc.ca/orton.htm) and quite like what it does for these types of images.
Can you guys let me know what you think?
Original:

PP'd

Paul
Critique This PP effort...Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Critique This PP effort...Hi there,
I was just playing with the "Digital Orton Effect" (more info here: http://www.pdpc.ca/orton.htm) and quite like what it does for these types of images. Can you guys let me know what you think? Original: ![]() PP'd ![]() Paul http://www.australiandigitalphotography.com
Living in poverty due to my addiction to NIKON... Is there a clinic that can help me?
Paul,
As much as I like the richer green colouring in a rainforest shot, the effect is way too bright and over-saturated. Would love to see a version with the same effect but a tad less saturation. Cheers Michael
No need to be sorry, That's what happens with most of the images I try to do more than the standard post processing to ![]() Paul http://www.australiandigitalphotography.com
Living in poverty due to my addiction to NIKON... Is there a clinic that can help me?
How is this one? A step in the right direction? Not enough? Other? ![]() http://www.australiandigitalphotography.com
Living in poverty due to my addiction to NIKON... Is there a clinic that can help me?
Paul,
Definitely better than the first attempt. Still slightly rich but better than the original, in my opinion. Would loved to have been there in person - looks like a magical spot. Cheers Michael
Original by a furlong, great work.
President, A.A.A.A.A (Australian Association Against Acronym Abuse)
Canon EOS R6, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 35mm F1.8, RF 16mm F2.8 "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)
prefer the original. Maybe try it with a pic that's not so outstanding as your first pic
![]() Hassy, Leica, Nikon, iPhone
Come follow the rabbit hole...
Ha! Great advice Piro and very apt in this instance I reckon. Seems to me a case of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", Paul. It's just too good a shot to play around with, IMHO. ![]() Simon
D300 l MB-D10 l D70 l SB-800 l 70-200 VR l TC 17-E l 18-70 f3.5-4.5 l 70-300 f4-5.6 l 50 f1.4 l 90 Macro f2.8 l 12-24 f4 http://www.redbubble.com/people/manta
I like the dreamy, glowing effect of the greenery, but the effect seems to be blowing out the water detail which I think is distracting the viewer... Maybe if the effect was applied to a feathered selection that excludes the water so you keep some detail in the water...?
Aka Andrew
Previous topic • Next topic
11 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|