05-19-10 – Skylines

Speaking of which, though, I need to get more themes into the queue…

Indeed; you’ve only 10 or 11 days to spare! But by that same token, and with due respect to ‘community driven’, wouldn’t it be fun to have a moderator’s theme? You’ve seen (I presume) all the contests (I’ve perused here and there, but really I’m only familiar with the last 10 or so). I’d think you and the other mods would be bestest at coming up with a really unusual, or unique, or just plain creative theme that would inspire the minions.

God only knows my ideas go over like farts in quiet churches (hey, THERE’s a theme idea!).

Anywho, whatever they are, it is time to replenish the dilithium crystals–it takes time to be creative, from this vantage point, and poor my best efforts may be, it helps to have the heads-up.

I think I must have done channel-swapping on the skyline picture. I don’t think the in the trees ever showed up like that straight out of the camera.

I’ll have to go back and try to find the raw files at home to see what they look like.

Hmmm…..

Has there been any discussion about this? I’ve seen lots of other people using digital IR from time to time in the themes, and never really thought about it. Now that I’ve started playing with it myself, and researching/learning, I’ve realized that the blue sky effect comes from the (pretty standard) process of swapping the red and blue channels. I was planning on bringing it up in discussion at some point, since I’m leary about using mine under the thoughts that channel swapping is too software intensive. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you should pull yours, I’m just curious if a decision was made before I came around, if it should be unaltered only from here out, or, since it’s been used fairly commonly in the past, let it be. Even unaltered out of the camera, you can get wild effects just by changing the white balance. On the road trip, I was shooting IR with WB braketing, and getting three completely different photos.

Great stuff in your directory, BTW. Here’s my foray into digital IR so far, All of them channel swapped, some with B+W 099 (orange) filter, some with Ha+IR (red astrophoto) filter.

well, if i recall correctly, it was considered to be kosher, as it was something that was applied evenly across the whole photo, like doing software editing for cross-processing.

Soosh Cool – Gotcha….. Makes me happy, more photos to choose from.

‘Guine – Yeah, exactly that.

Soosh Cool – Gotcha….. Makes me happy, more photos to choose from.

‘Guine – Yeah, exactly that.

I would have no problem with allowing people to do this in their IR photos since it seems like a fairly normal process to do on them. I dont think we want people going crazy with this on regular photos, but the rules already say not to go overboard making images look cartoonish or unrealistic so I think we’re ok there.

Until this contest I have never had a picture above U-man. All this last couple of days the foggy lighthouse has been really popular it seems. I am currently tied for fourth place with U-man so that is still better than I have ever done before. It’s not a win yet but close enough for this week if the votes don’t change again before close of voting. Woo Hoo!

And congrats to Elsinore for passing 10,000 votes with this contest 🙂

I either passed 2000 votes this week or last week, also tied for the most votes I have gotten for a single picture and it is the best I have ever placed also. I didn’t think I would beat staplermofo. But I came closer to first than ever before.

congrats staplermofo. That was the picture I figured would win when I saw how many votes it got in the first hour or so.

I thought digital crossprocessing was OK because either traditional or digital, it’s done to the image in the course of developing it for final. With film, you’re processing it in the wrong type of chemicals for a certain look, with digital, you’re doing the same thing equally across the photo for the same sort of look. I can’t see why one would be ok and the other wouldn’t.