Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

I'm entering a photograph contest in national geographic traveler magazine.


PhillyB

Recommended Posts

also - i have never edited any picture i've ever taken. nat geo is fairly picky about editing, but there's certain things you can do. any suggestions on basic things that could be done to improve the quality of any of these?

on the one I like of the tuk tuk boy, you might could add a blur filter to everything but his face... to kinda focus it even more... dunno how it would turn out though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I threw it in PS to show you what I was talking about...

childrenofhopecopy.jpg

I tried a radial blur but it got too funky looking, so I did a motion one with the boy isolated...

For this one, I just did the same as above and tweaked the brightness/contrast of the boy a little bit...

childrenofhopecopy2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I threw it in PS to show you what I was talking about...

childrenofhopecopy.jpg

I tried a radial blur but it got too funky looking, so I did a motion one with the boy isolated...

For this one, I just did the same as above and tweaked the brightness/contrast of the boy a little bit...

childrenofhopecopy2.jpg

The original is much better.

If you need to add photoshop hackery to an image, its not a good image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original is much better.

If you need to add photoshop hackery to an image, its not a good image.

IF the ultimate use of the photograph warrants "photoshop hackery," then it's fine. For an advertisement, for effect, etc. -- but you're right, for the NatGeo purposes, the only "enhancements" that should be considered should be for toning and clarity and not for a major change in the image's character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I've liked him since his rookie year as a prospect, but when he's been asked to play in a large capacity, he has simply not done well.   He does not really add anything, rather muddies up the room.  Fant is TERRIBLE as a blocker, a pure receiving TE.   Let's just put Tremble aside since he's PUP (although I still like him as a TE2, but yeah he's not our future starter)... Sanders has already shown better receiving skills than a Fant and has a nice ceiling.  Not to mention, he's got in-line run blocking skills.  I really want to see what he's capable of this year.  Also has a year+ experience now in Canales' offense, not to mention legit chemistry with Bryce. And after Sanders, I also imagine our staff is waiting to see how Mitchell Evans looks in camp as he's got the in-line blocking skills.  If he looks fully capable of filling in behind Sanders, then I don't see a need.  Overall, keep an eye out on early August moves.  They are usually soft indicators of how staff's view their rookie late rounders and roster overall.  This is a wait and see what the market presents and how they think their unit looks in camp.  
    • Every team has different needs of the backup QB.   On some teams a young hopeful makes sense and on others an old worn out dude makes sense.  We are a little more in the in-between IMO where you probably would prefer a Fields, Pickett, Howell type IMO.   So a young disappoint that you there is still some hail mary hope in.....given BY essentially was benched both seasons for performance (I know that's not the official line going into Seattle but I think most would agree he got a break and should of been benched later that year).  I know we want Bryce to be the week 17 guy all season this upcoming year.  But it's still in the reasonable thought process that the other dude could show back up. 
    • I wouldn't mind it if they bring him in cheap for competition. I would imagine he would vie for the 3rd TE spot with the rookie. 
×
×
  • Create New...