Chica gave me the idea to try this, over at her Photo Projectz blog (link) .

I'd thought of trying to make a DIY lightbox in the past, but never felt motivated enough to gather the bits and pieces necessary... as well, I only have the most basic of tools stashed away in the apartment, so even though the DIY projects I'd seen were very simple (PVC pipe, light wood, etc), it was still sort of a nuisance it seemed.

But after having Chica remind me about this idea, I searched some more and found a real ghetto version made out of nothing but a cardboard box, some tracing paper, poster paper, and some tape. I already had the box and tape, so about $2.50 later I had everything I needed.

I'm not really sure why I've been wanting to try this, as I don't do closeup, macro photography, for which this would be great. I'd LIKE to, but I don't own a macro lens (one day... one day...) .

But... still.. it was fun to play around with, and will give me something to monkey around with on days when I don't feel like going out with the camera.

Anyhoo, I'll share a few examples... my first attempts with this... followed by a photo of the low-class setup.

I wasn't able to completely eliminate the shadows... I really didn't have the proper lights. The swing arm lamp was perfect, but the tube on the other side wasn't quite cutting it.

The images have only been cropped and slightly sharpened in Photoshop.

It seems like spring has MAYBE finally sprung here in the (supposedly) sunny, warm, Okanagan... so in the spirit of all that is warm, soft, and green, I thought I'd post a new photo.

And as fate would have it, Chica posted an entry at her Photo Projectz blog about something called the Orton Effect. (The Orton Effect is named after Michael Orton who first used the technique is a sandwich of two images, one in focus the other out of focus.)

It's something initially, and normally, done with slide film. But the digital age makes it easy to do when postprocessing digital images.

The end result is a soft, "glowing" image that can improve the look of certain photos.

Whatchoo folks think?

(Thanks, Chica, for the inspiration to dig out this photo from last year and play with it. :) )

**Click Image To Enlarge**



(Hosted on my Flickr Album)

Hey all... I'd like some input here.

I've been trying to fine tune a Photoshop 'effect' on some rodeo photos I took last year. I've edited several of them, and printed them out at a large-ish size (11"x14") to give away to a few people as gifts, and I'm doing another to donate to a silent auction at a family reunion next month.

The effect I've worked at is to create a somewhat "hand-drawn" look. Moving the photo away from looking like a photo, towards a 'photo-realistic' drawing, so to speak.

The ones I've done before have all been black and white... it just seems to fit the subject.

All the ones I've done before, I've gotten to the end in different ways. I follow the same basic steps, but each one is a bit different in what I do... which means the end result is always a little different. Some I like more than others... and of course, the very first one I did, is my favorite (which I gave to my dad) , and that's the one that I created the most haphazardly... just monkeying around... so it's essentially something I can't reproduce exactly. Doh!

So, anyway, I'm working on this new one... and I'm not done yet... but I'm liking what I've got so far.

Problem is, at the stage I'm at, I can't decide if I should stick with Black and White, or full colour, or a muted, desaturated colour.

That's where you guys come in.

I'd like you to look at the following three crops from the image, and tell me which one gives you the most hand-drawn look.

Remember that I'm not done yet, so there will be more monkeying around to get the final effect... but just at this step right now, which gives you the strongest impression of hand-drawn.

Please look at the images full-size. (click the images)

Much appreciated.

(1) Full Colour





(2) Muted Colour





(3) Greyscale