My first entry into the belated April Portrait Assignment. Now you see why I said it was OK to have animal portraits...I knew I had this image, and was keen to work on it for this assignment. I think it qualifies as a portrait, so no apologies from me. I also knew that D would have some seal shots, and G may have camels...
What is the photo of/ When was the photo taken/ Where was the photo taken
Our next door neighbour’s cat (Jimmy) from our previous rental house in Cambridge. It was taken sometime in Autumn 2005 (October, I think).
Why was the photo taken
I’m not a cat fan (Sorry, G), but this cat won me over. Friendly, affectionate and very cute. He would come round and put his head down on the sill of the open patio door, all cute and expectant. I wanted to get some shots, as we were moving and so was he and his owner. I nearly kidnapped him…
Why was this composition chosen
Like all cats, he chose the composition! He rested his head on the sill of the patio door, and let me get in real close, and fire off lots of shots. I had in mind to do some PS work on it, so I knew I needed lots of shots, to make sure I got just the framing I wanted.
I wanted to crop in tight, and create a really intimate animal portrait, and this was my way of concentrating the attention on the face, the eyes, whiskers etc (more below).
How was the photo taken
I don’t have the camera (EXIF) data to hand, but it was wide aperture, moderate (1/50) shutter speed, lying down on my belly getting close in.
How was the photo processed
I have included the original, so you can see the amount of work that went into the final picture.
.jpg)
.jpg)
I wanted to create the impression of the face coming out of the darkness, so I copied a colour from the black of the cat, and, on a new layer, filled that in with the paintbucket tool. Then, using a blending layer mask, I blended the cat’s face to merge into that shadowy background. I also used various adjustment masks to improve contrast and colour etc, and used some selective masking to bring out the eyes and nose. I also used selective sharpening mask to sharpen the eyes and nose etc to further draw the attention in. I removed some gunk from the left (as you look at it) eye, but should have removed from the right too.
As ever, I await your valued critique.
Cheers
Ivan
4 comments:
Hi there,
Finally, here is my rating:
Impact - 7
The eye staring straight at you, the dark boundary around the white clean face, had an impact on me. I am not a cat fan either, but this did hit me when I first saw it.
Composition - 8
It is a safe composition but it is well composed, with the face centred in the frame and a clean black boundary to bring out the whiteness in the face. It immediately focuses the eye on what is important. Tightly cropped too.
Light/Colour - 7.5
The white hair is white white, the eyes are bright (although the right eye is less bright than the left) and the nose is a nice delicate pink. It's difficult to judge because the photo has been digitally altered but the original seems to have been shot well enough for the colours to work in the portrait.
Technical skill - 8
Lots of digital skill went into creating this image. The left eye, compared with the original, is bright, crisp and sharp, but the right eye lets the side down. More work was needed here; it would have raised the score; two bright sharp eyes staring right at you; killer. However, this type of digital manipulation requires considerable experience at photoshop as well as a keen understanding of what the final image should be. So high marks here.
Originality - 6
It is not original but there is some originality. Using the black of the cat as the background to really bring out the face is a neat idea. Probably used a lot in people portraits but I don't recall seeing such a shot with animals.
Overall, 7.3
I like the shot. It's not a WOW photo but it definitely stands out. Lots of thought and creative talent went into the shot. It was let down by the right eye.
Damian
How come you scored originality as a 6, but said "Probably used a lot in people portraits but I don't recall seeing such a shot with animals." Seems a tad inconsistent - can you expand?
Agree about the right eye - good spot.
Cheers
Ivan
I don't like the Original rating because it brings down the rating of good photos but, it does make us think more about originality and therefore makes us better photographers.
As I sit here and think about what I scored for originality, I realise that you are right. I was inconsistent. I have seen this approach in people portraits, but not in animals. So I should score higher.
The 'approach' is not entirely original because it has been used with people, but applying it to animals is, so I will give a revised score of 8. Which pushes your overall score up to a 7.7.
Sorry for the inconsistent thought.
Damian
Damian
I agree about the Originality aspect, but I also agree that it should stay, as it makes us think...so it should bring scores down overall, even if it's a good example of a well-defined genre.
As for changing scores, we said we'd not do that, but we should be as consistent as possible. We'll await and see what G thinks...
Post a Comment