| Deviant Login | Shop | Join deviantART for FREE  |
Take the Tour  |
| Photography / Animals, Plants & Nature / Landscapes | ©2012-2013 *sirgerg |
The Journal Portal
Browse Journals |
Polls |
deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]
Keep in Touch!
|
Deviousness `anmari has been spreading her infectious positivity throughout our community for over 6 years. Throughout this time Ana has been at the core of all things devious, passionately developing an eclectic gallery, helping organise devmeets, participating in chat events and also recently completed dedicating her time as a Community Volunteer. We are absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for May 2013 to `anmari, congratulations! Read More
|
Sta.sh
1. Knowing how razor sharp your Photoshop (and other) skills are, I always wonder when admiring your photos, how much manipulation goes on before I see them here on DA. I always like to think that little or no after effects were involved, and my gut tells me I'm correct, but I just had ask at some point... I'm just always so curious.
2. I assume that in very wide angled shots such as this that you're merging multiple shots? Do you simply use Photomerge or do you find that a more manual approach suits your needs better? Any insight would be great. Thanks.
1) I do a certain amount of post-work on my photos, but I restrict it to getting the photo the way I remember it from the shoot -- there's a certain amount of "being there" that gets lost when you're just looking at a raw capture (which is the camera's interpretation of the scene) and I always strive to get that back. Some images may receive significant color, contrast and focus help, others get hardly any at all.
2) I do use photomerge... I hand-stitched my composites in the past (back when 3-7 images was the norm) but now that I regularly stitch 50+ images for a scene it is far more efficient to let photoshop do the math (and it does a great job too).
Would love to visit somewhere with awesome scenery such as this!