[jimjam]

February 11, 2008 at 4:55 pm

nfl-fan wrote:

It’s meant as a bit of fun. There’s no judging, no learning, no challenge, no expectations. If we can’t have a bit of fun then what have we?

My bad, I thought it was an excercise.

[jimjam]

February 11, 2008 at 4:00 pm

nfl-fan wrote:

jimjam… I agree that the title is a bit misleading… but after that I don’t see what the issue is.

If you wanna play about with RGH’s image then give it and go. If not then just choose to ignore it. Can’t see the point in griping over nothing.

Im not gripping over nothing. I just made a statement that I think the “photoshop challenge” could be made into more of a challenge as opposed to the “photoshop mess about”. Seeing as the photoshop challenge threads are locked, and it seemed like bad form to critique the submissions from other winners I took the opportunity to air my views on this thread as it was slightly relevant and close to being in the right place.

I used to teach photoshop to photographers a few years ago. I found that goal based assignments, technical challenges etc made the students learn the many many tools in photoshop much faster than simply trying to enhance a photo.

I think that for the benefit of people who are somewhat inexperienced using photoshop a goal based technical challenge would be more use than a totally subjective “play with my picture” type challenges that have been the norm. Also it would mean that the winner could be judged objectively as opposed to subjectively.

Wrong thread perhaps, but thats what I was trying to get across.

[jimjam]

February 11, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Mark wrote:

My fault as I moved it in here, coz it wasn’t photo critique. It might find itself somewhere else now :)

Well there should definately be a photoshop forum as well as just the challenge.

[jimjam]

February 11, 2008 at 3:18 pm

RGH_Photography wrote:

Ok if this is in the wrong place please move it but i didnt want to invade the photoshop challange room :)

Here is an image along with a link to a RAW file of the same, the RAW is only 8Mb apx so its not a big download.

I wanted to see what sort of ideas everyone would come up with much like a photshop challange but without the voting, please have a go and post up your results :)

Links to download the RAW file.

The image unprocessed.

Thanks
Ricky.

To be honest mate I think the name photoshop training is a bit of a misnomer. The image you posted really requires little in the way of hardcore photoshop to enhance it and regardless of the quality of the end result its still very subjective to an individuals tastes. I know you only posted up the image for people to mess around with but I think as a technical excercise or a “challenge” for anyone to actually improve at photoshop the “challenge” should have a specific goal or end requirment. That will mean that the judging in the ps challenge would be less subjective and people would be pushed to actually deliver an image up to a certain standard as opposed to simply having a play about until they get bored.

Sorry to be grumpy balls here and all, just my two cents.

[jimjam]

February 3, 2008 at 11:07 pm

Well Ive said my bit, Im not going there.

[jimjam]

February 3, 2008 at 10:58 pm

stcstc wrote:

Jimjam

I have to disagree with you. I have worked in the media industry for 20 years. and have always used both.

In terms of 3d i do agree. but some points

What open gl cards are you using that you cant run in a mac pro, I guess you mean stuff like the latest FireGL stuff.

I dont understand why you need 300 layers in an after effects project, surly your pre comping things and proxy useage sorts it out

I do a lot of work with hollywood DVD studios, and most of them are buying mac pro machines to run windows to run their software encoders on, as the cost of ownership is actually much less than the same spec in a branded box, like hp or even boxx systems or someone

Hi,
Its not a question of cards. Im not a programmer so I cant explain exactly why macs dont perform as well in 3d. They just dont. Ive recently answered that with 100% certainty to my mind. They just cant display textures and push polys around the same way a lower spec pc can. The software support for 3d apps is pathetic too, its just not a viable platform for 3d. Even running xp pro 64 and running lightwave, a dual xeon quad core with 16 gigs or ram and nvidia 8800 still couldnt display the same no. of polys as a much less powerfull pc. Believe me I was surprised, and it wasnt a one off as we were borrowing 2 very similar specced machines for rendering. They had been bought specifically for 3d by another company. Render times were good though.

As for the layers in afx, pretty hard to explain but it was basically a project that was replicating traditional cell animation but in an almost photorealistic context, it had massive amounts of 3d particle effects layers not to mention a deep parralax scrolling effect with a very detailed back drop. I wouldnt want to do it again thats for sure! but it is relevant to illustrate the point that pc’s are for real when it comes to design.

Ive been looking at upgrading recently and I still think that macs v any pc price wise the advantage still goes to pc. I was actually looking at boxx workstations, but they are just too expensive (although they have specs that no mac can come close to at the higher end). I actually found a company called Armari who Im very impressed with, check em out.

BTW 20 years…do you still have your lettraset kit :lol:

[jimjam]

February 3, 2008 at 8:03 pm

You can debate this all day long but imo (as a motion graphics designer) pc’s will always deliver more bang for your buck. The whole “macs just work” is utter crap. Ive been using macs and pc’s since photoshop 3 on os 7 . Recently Ive been using G5’s with dual xeon quad cores and 16 gigs of ram and they have proved to be stupidly unstable. In the past Ive had photoshop files with almost 200 layers and after effects projects with over 300. Recently Ive been editing 32 bit 50 megapixel true HDR images with 26 e’vs which are over a gig per image.

For low end use macs are fine, but once pushed they crash (and I mean totally hang) with alarming regularity. In my line of work they just cant cut it. I use a combination of photoshop, after effects, lightwave, z brush illustrator and a fair few others (often with multiple apps running simultaneously) . Macs are about 2 generations behind in terms of 3d apps, graphics cards and open gl.

The only reason to buy a mac in favour of a pc is vanity. The equivalent cost pc will be substantially more powerfull than its mac counterpart. The components are on the whole identical.

If you spend the price of a half decent mac laptop on a pc your going to have something pretty usefull as opposed to a paper weight. But what would I know, macs are better for design :roll:

[jimjam]

January 27, 2008 at 9:15 pm

irishwonkafan wrote:

:lol: No, HDR is a process you put a photograph through to balance the highlights and shadows. You’ll find more info here : http://www.hdrsoft.com/examples.html

Alan.

Actually no its not. I see a lot of talk on this and other forums about hdr. It seems that most people confuse tone mapping with hdr. Tone mapping is a process of balancing multiple exposures to create on image, or adjusting the high and low light areas of an image to balance it.

True high dynamic range imagery is a 32 bit image which closely resembles the levels of luminance found in real life without clipping pixelation or distortion. It should have a minimum of 11 ev in traditional terms. To put it basically.

But wonkafan is still correct , your image is not hdr.

[jimjam]

September 5, 2007 at 1:46 pm

Alright folks, here is my effort and incidentally my first submission to the forum.

[/img]

[jimjam]

August 23, 2007 at 5:53 pm

stcstc wrote:

Welcome jimjam

so as a motion graphics designer, spennding more time in after effects than photoshop is the difference isnt it??

Well………….after effects and lightwave, cinema 4d, illustrator, premier, maya, and a few others :D but yeah photoshop is just one weapon in the arsenal, as opposed to the entire gun case.

[jimjam]

August 23, 2007 at 3:53 pm

Ali wrote:

Hey jimjam :) welcome to the site – post loads and get your freak on!

Copy that. Will do :D

[jimjam]

August 23, 2007 at 11:05 am

irishwonkafan wrote:

Photoshop challanges, eh? Aren’t graphic designers barred…Mark? Mark?

Welcome to the site. The best therapy for free!

Alan.

Im not a graphic designer :wink: