Photography

[zeb]

[mf]

all of the processing to add the 'grime' was done by hand in Photoshop (no scripts, add-ons or filters) - http://mjfphoto.ca/blog/2014/12/6/press-room

That's rad, Mike. Can you elaborate on your process?

Sure.

I use a bunch of custom brush sets, most of which i've downloaded from various places over the years. Google "dirt brush" and you'll probably find some. So i guess i sorta do use an "add-on" in the sense that i'm too lazy to create my own custom brush sets for this . I meant more that I don't use any 3rd party extensions, cause i'm sure you can get some. Anyways I'll use these brushes to paint dirt and grit onto the image using various different hues and opacity values. I'll usually end up with a handful of these painted layers and i'll play around with the blending modes on each, 'color burn', 'screen' and 'multiply' seem to give the best results for this kind of work.

After that i'll add another image or two on top of the original. These are usually texture images like a rusyt concrete wall, or oil stained pavement, something like that. Then i'll play with the blending mode and opacity of the layer til i get something I like. I keep a bank of these on file that i either find or take myself, much like this one:




It's a fairly time consuming process so rather than recreate it for each image in a set, i'll group all the layes and copy them onto each image and then rotate or flip some of the layers to make it look a little more unique from shot to shot.

I'd be happy to send you a PSD file of one of these if you want to see it deconstructed.

[zeb]

Ah, I went through a huge phase of this on my iPhone: collecting textures and light leaks, using apps to blend images, fine tuning opacity, screens, etc.

Far too labour intensive for me these days.

[mf]

Ah, I went through a huge phase of this on my iPhone: collecting textures and light leaks, using apps to blend images, fine tuning opacity, screens, etc.

Far too labour intensive for me these days.

i can just imagine how tedious that would be on the phone.

[nyquillyn]

[LetMeSleep]

T2b and zeb.

I'm about to buy my wife a camera around the $600-800 mark. Looking at the canon 600d or the 100d. It's mainly for family shots.

Would you guys recommend another camera or does that look a good one? Cheers in advance.

[nyquillyn]

Hmmmm. Well, I have the 100d and I like it. I must say however that the stock lens (18-55mm STM) is not great. So if you go that route, I'd suggest buying the body only and having a look at Amazon for the best reviewed lens. The body goes for about $450, so if you're willing to go to $800, that would give you a decent chunk to work with for the lens.

I have to be honest here and say that I pretty much never touch my DSLR at this point. I'm still in love with my RX-100. It produces great images and has great manual controls. I lead a fairly active lifestyle and the RX-100 is a perfect fit in that regard. If I had to lug around a huge camera bag during our Montana adventure this summer, I doubt I would have even taken a camera after the first hike or would have just ended up shooting with my cell exclusively. As it was, it was easy just to pull the RX out of a pocket, snap a couple of pics and move on. That being said, the optical zoom on the RX-100 is pretty limited. If I would have had my DSLR during our trip, I would have a couple of decent grizzly shots. Still, the RX-100 is a great camera that has kept photography fun.

Version 3 of the RX-100, which includes a viewfinder, goes for $700 to $800. Version 1 can be found for about $400 and Version 2 for $600 to $650.

[LetMeSleep]

Cheers t2b. I've read a few reviews saying the lens wasn't great. Apparently the 600d is being discontinued and there are sales on at the moment. I'm pretty sure I'll grab one and my wife can get a lens later on.

That Sony looks like a pretty good little camera. I may try one of those in store before I opt for the 600d.

Thanks mate for your info. Most appreciated.

[zeb]

I agree with Charlie, you definitely want one of the RX-100s, probably the II.

[LetMeSleep]

I agree with Charlie, you definitely want one of the RX-100s, probably the II.

I know she's been talking about a DSLR. I think I'll talk to her first now before I buy one.

Thanks fellas.

[zeb]

Check out some reviews but most users will agree that the RX-100 is able to take comparable photos to entry level DSLRs and is only a fraction of the size/weight. It's a hard combo to beat.

[nyquillyn]

[nyquillyn]

LMS, if you do end up with one of the Canon cameras, make sure to check out their f/1.8 50mm lens. You can generally find it for around $120 US. It's perfect for family portraits.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-Standa ... 8990646763

[mf]

LMS, if you do end up with one of the Canon cameras, make sure to check out their f/1.8 50mm lens. You can generally find it for around $120 US. It's perfect for family portraits.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-50mm-Standa ... 8990646763

there is an equivalent lens for Nikon too that is about $10-20 more.

[zeb]

Yep, the nifty fifty is a stocking filler for sure.

[LetMeSleep]

Cheers gentlemen.

[zeb]

Top ten, t2b.

[nyquillyn]

[oasisfan35]

Top ten, t2b.

Indeed, that's a great shot.

[nyquillyn]

Thanks, fellas.