What type of postprocessing gives the effect of people standing outWhat techniques were used in this late...
Are small insurances worth it
Achieving MPPT of a solar panel with LM2596
Levi-Civita symbol: 3D matrix
Is there a math equivalent to the conditional ternary operator?
How do ISS astronauts "get their stripes"?
Skis versus snow shoes - when to choose which for travelling the backcountry?
In the comics did Thanos "kill" just sentient beings or all creatures with the snap?
I encountered my boss during an on-site interview at another company. Should I bring it up when seeing him next time?
Why do phishing e-mails use faked e-mail addresses instead of the real one?
Filling in Area Under Curve Causes Alignment Issues
Why is s'abonner reflexive?
It took me a lot of time to make this, pls like. (YouTube Comments #1)
How can atoms be electrically neutral when there is a difference in the positions of the charges?
I can't die. Who am I?
Traversing Africa: A Cryptic Journey
Center single line(s) in align
Is there any relevance to Thor getting his hair cut other than comedic value?
All possible A of Ax=b with constraints on A
What type of postprocessing gives the effect of people standing out
In Adventurer's League, is it possible to keep the Ring of Winter if you manage to acquire it in the Tomb of Annihilation adventure?
Can I become debt free or should I file for bankruptcy? How do I manage my debt and finances?
Rationale to prefer local variables over instance variables?
Is divide-by-zero a security vulnerability?
Where is the line between being obedient and getting bullied by a boss
What type of postprocessing gives the effect of people standing out
What techniques were used in this late 1970s car ad featuring a family picnicking with giraffes?How does one create the Dave Hill effect for portraits/action shots?Can post-processing save these pictures? (shooting through mesh netting)How to postprocess photos with lots of blue haze?What is the difference between an exposure slider and a levels slider?How to remove flaws from multiple images?Filtering narrow spectral lines in digital postprocessingHow can I take portraits in the style of Charles Hildreth?Automatic identification of lucky images for landscape photographyWhy is there a “ring” mark in night photos?What makes this interior photo look unrealistic?
Below are real photographs, I was present when they were shot. The photographs were taken between 12:00 to 14:00 on a slightly overcast day. The photographer may have taken many frames.
What postprocessing was likely done, such that the people stand out in the photographs?
post-processing software
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
|
show 9 more comments
Below are real photographs, I was present when they were shot. The photographs were taken between 12:00 to 14:00 on a slightly overcast day. The photographer may have taken many frames.
What postprocessing was likely done, such that the people stand out in the photographs?
post-processing software
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
11
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
8
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
3
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
2
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
Below are real photographs, I was present when they were shot. The photographs were taken between 12:00 to 14:00 on a slightly overcast day. The photographer may have taken many frames.
What postprocessing was likely done, such that the people stand out in the photographs?
post-processing software
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Below are real photographs, I was present when they were shot. The photographs were taken between 12:00 to 14:00 on a slightly overcast day. The photographer may have taken many frames.
What postprocessing was likely done, such that the people stand out in the photographs?
post-processing software
post-processing software
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
edited yesterday
Tetsujin
8,02821948
8,02821948
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
asked yesterday
Happy PhantomHappy Phantom
4315
4315
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Happy Phantom is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
3
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
11
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
8
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
3
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
2
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
3
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
11
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
8
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
3
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
2
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday
3
3
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
11
11
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
8
8
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
3
3
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
2
2
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
I'd guess it's as simple as selecting the subject in Photoshop - with a tad more care & attention than I've used below, then leeching out the saturation in the background & tonally balancing towards a sepia effect.
As a very quick demo I did the same thing but made it a pretty garish purple instead.
Once you have your mask you can treat inside & outside of it in totally different ways.
The subjects have been left with realistic colouration, which I think is what is providing the majority of the visual separation - that & the physical separation from the ground, which pushes them into the unsharp area of the background. Note how the effect is less emphatic on the small boy, especially lower, where he's connected to the equally sharp ground at that distance.
I don't think the focus has been played with. I think it was shot on a wide enough aperture that the background is blurred by simple distance. The ground underneath them is still reasonably sharp.
I also don't think it would be compulsory to be using flash, so long as enough light was getting in, or set to a high-enough ISO, to use a short exposure.
The light on the people & the trees seems to match - little to no shadow at all, which matches the OP's description & the almost 'white-out' cloud cover in the back of the shot.
Late addition
I'm not seeing any hint of even a slight fill-flash. Shadows just don't match, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Didn't the photographer use flash?
A common practice to make subjects "stand out" is to use flash for proper subject exposure, and to use camera settings to slightly underexposure the background. That is my guess here, instead of post processing.
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
add a comment |
There area few ways of making such photographs. You could, for instance, use a large aperture to create a shallow depth of field whereby you blur out the background. The human eye doesn't like to look at things that out of focus. By creating a shallow DOF, you will put visual emphasis on your subject.
Another way is by creating contrast between your subject and the background. One way to do this is by having your subject brighter than the background. You could use fill flash or simply place your subject in a scene where they have more light falling onto them than the background.
Combining these two methods would be even better.
What the photographer has done with the images that you've posted is to create a composite. The images are apparently a combination of a background and the people were placed over it. The photographer either took the background image out of focus, or used a blur filter (i.e. Gaussian blur)..
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
add a comment |
It's flash, very clearly. If the photographer says there "may have been" on camera flash used, then that's it.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Happy Phantom is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f105645%2fwhat-type-of-postprocessing-gives-the-effect-of-people-standing-out%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I'd guess it's as simple as selecting the subject in Photoshop - with a tad more care & attention than I've used below, then leeching out the saturation in the background & tonally balancing towards a sepia effect.
As a very quick demo I did the same thing but made it a pretty garish purple instead.
Once you have your mask you can treat inside & outside of it in totally different ways.
The subjects have been left with realistic colouration, which I think is what is providing the majority of the visual separation - that & the physical separation from the ground, which pushes them into the unsharp area of the background. Note how the effect is less emphatic on the small boy, especially lower, where he's connected to the equally sharp ground at that distance.
I don't think the focus has been played with. I think it was shot on a wide enough aperture that the background is blurred by simple distance. The ground underneath them is still reasonably sharp.
I also don't think it would be compulsory to be using flash, so long as enough light was getting in, or set to a high-enough ISO, to use a short exposure.
The light on the people & the trees seems to match - little to no shadow at all, which matches the OP's description & the almost 'white-out' cloud cover in the back of the shot.
Late addition
I'm not seeing any hint of even a slight fill-flash. Shadows just don't match, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I'd guess it's as simple as selecting the subject in Photoshop - with a tad more care & attention than I've used below, then leeching out the saturation in the background & tonally balancing towards a sepia effect.
As a very quick demo I did the same thing but made it a pretty garish purple instead.
Once you have your mask you can treat inside & outside of it in totally different ways.
The subjects have been left with realistic colouration, which I think is what is providing the majority of the visual separation - that & the physical separation from the ground, which pushes them into the unsharp area of the background. Note how the effect is less emphatic on the small boy, especially lower, where he's connected to the equally sharp ground at that distance.
I don't think the focus has been played with. I think it was shot on a wide enough aperture that the background is blurred by simple distance. The ground underneath them is still reasonably sharp.
I also don't think it would be compulsory to be using flash, so long as enough light was getting in, or set to a high-enough ISO, to use a short exposure.
The light on the people & the trees seems to match - little to no shadow at all, which matches the OP's description & the almost 'white-out' cloud cover in the back of the shot.
Late addition
I'm not seeing any hint of even a slight fill-flash. Shadows just don't match, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
add a comment |
I'd guess it's as simple as selecting the subject in Photoshop - with a tad more care & attention than I've used below, then leeching out the saturation in the background & tonally balancing towards a sepia effect.
As a very quick demo I did the same thing but made it a pretty garish purple instead.
Once you have your mask you can treat inside & outside of it in totally different ways.
The subjects have been left with realistic colouration, which I think is what is providing the majority of the visual separation - that & the physical separation from the ground, which pushes them into the unsharp area of the background. Note how the effect is less emphatic on the small boy, especially lower, where he's connected to the equally sharp ground at that distance.
I don't think the focus has been played with. I think it was shot on a wide enough aperture that the background is blurred by simple distance. The ground underneath them is still reasonably sharp.
I also don't think it would be compulsory to be using flash, so long as enough light was getting in, or set to a high-enough ISO, to use a short exposure.
The light on the people & the trees seems to match - little to no shadow at all, which matches the OP's description & the almost 'white-out' cloud cover in the back of the shot.
Late addition
I'm not seeing any hint of even a slight fill-flash. Shadows just don't match, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
I'd guess it's as simple as selecting the subject in Photoshop - with a tad more care & attention than I've used below, then leeching out the saturation in the background & tonally balancing towards a sepia effect.
As a very quick demo I did the same thing but made it a pretty garish purple instead.
Once you have your mask you can treat inside & outside of it in totally different ways.
The subjects have been left with realistic colouration, which I think is what is providing the majority of the visual separation - that & the physical separation from the ground, which pushes them into the unsharp area of the background. Note how the effect is less emphatic on the small boy, especially lower, where he's connected to the equally sharp ground at that distance.
I don't think the focus has been played with. I think it was shot on a wide enough aperture that the background is blurred by simple distance. The ground underneath them is still reasonably sharp.
I also don't think it would be compulsory to be using flash, so long as enough light was getting in, or set to a high-enough ISO, to use a short exposure.
The light on the people & the trees seems to match - little to no shadow at all, which matches the OP's description & the almost 'white-out' cloud cover in the back of the shot.
Late addition
I'm not seeing any hint of even a slight fill-flash. Shadows just don't match, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
edited 2 hours ago
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
answered yesterday
TetsujinTetsujin
8,02821948
8,02821948
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
add a comment |
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
8
8
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
If you’re going to go full fake, you may as well go full Disney child pop star album cover with it. +1
– Hueco
yesterday
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
A friend posted a similar image recently taken to a logical extreme: the background was B&W and fairly low contrast; the subject was in colour (and wearing bright clothes). I know this was processed from a single shot because I'm familiar with the setting. It seems to be in at the moment
– Chris H
11 hours ago
3
3
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
Google automagically does the same thing with some photos that I take with my phone. In my images the subject is in full color, and everything else is black and white. Google calls it "color pop".
– chue x
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Didn't the photographer use flash?
A common practice to make subjects "stand out" is to use flash for proper subject exposure, and to use camera settings to slightly underexposure the background. That is my guess here, instead of post processing.
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
add a comment |
Didn't the photographer use flash?
A common practice to make subjects "stand out" is to use flash for proper subject exposure, and to use camera settings to slightly underexposure the background. That is my guess here, instead of post processing.
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
add a comment |
Didn't the photographer use flash?
A common practice to make subjects "stand out" is to use flash for proper subject exposure, and to use camera settings to slightly underexposure the background. That is my guess here, instead of post processing.
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
Didn't the photographer use flash?
A common practice to make subjects "stand out" is to use flash for proper subject exposure, and to use camera settings to slightly underexposure the background. That is my guess here, instead of post processing.
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
answered yesterday
WayneFWayneF
10k1924
10k1924
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
add a comment |
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
1
1
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
There was another photographer who was using a flash, but the woman in this photograph insists that there was no external flash used for these images. There may have been a flash on the camera itself.
– dotancohen
yesterday
add a comment |
There area few ways of making such photographs. You could, for instance, use a large aperture to create a shallow depth of field whereby you blur out the background. The human eye doesn't like to look at things that out of focus. By creating a shallow DOF, you will put visual emphasis on your subject.
Another way is by creating contrast between your subject and the background. One way to do this is by having your subject brighter than the background. You could use fill flash or simply place your subject in a scene where they have more light falling onto them than the background.
Combining these two methods would be even better.
What the photographer has done with the images that you've posted is to create a composite. The images are apparently a combination of a background and the people were placed over it. The photographer either took the background image out of focus, or used a blur filter (i.e. Gaussian blur)..
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
add a comment |
There area few ways of making such photographs. You could, for instance, use a large aperture to create a shallow depth of field whereby you blur out the background. The human eye doesn't like to look at things that out of focus. By creating a shallow DOF, you will put visual emphasis on your subject.
Another way is by creating contrast between your subject and the background. One way to do this is by having your subject brighter than the background. You could use fill flash or simply place your subject in a scene where they have more light falling onto them than the background.
Combining these two methods would be even better.
What the photographer has done with the images that you've posted is to create a composite. The images are apparently a combination of a background and the people were placed over it. The photographer either took the background image out of focus, or used a blur filter (i.e. Gaussian blur)..
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
add a comment |
There area few ways of making such photographs. You could, for instance, use a large aperture to create a shallow depth of field whereby you blur out the background. The human eye doesn't like to look at things that out of focus. By creating a shallow DOF, you will put visual emphasis on your subject.
Another way is by creating contrast between your subject and the background. One way to do this is by having your subject brighter than the background. You could use fill flash or simply place your subject in a scene where they have more light falling onto them than the background.
Combining these two methods would be even better.
What the photographer has done with the images that you've posted is to create a composite. The images are apparently a combination of a background and the people were placed over it. The photographer either took the background image out of focus, or used a blur filter (i.e. Gaussian blur)..
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
There area few ways of making such photographs. You could, for instance, use a large aperture to create a shallow depth of field whereby you blur out the background. The human eye doesn't like to look at things that out of focus. By creating a shallow DOF, you will put visual emphasis on your subject.
Another way is by creating contrast between your subject and the background. One way to do this is by having your subject brighter than the background. You could use fill flash or simply place your subject in a scene where they have more light falling onto them than the background.
Combining these two methods would be even better.
What the photographer has done with the images that you've posted is to create a composite. The images are apparently a combination of a background and the people were placed over it. The photographer either took the background image out of focus, or used a blur filter (i.e. Gaussian blur)..
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
6447
6447
add a comment |
add a comment |
It's flash, very clearly. If the photographer says there "may have been" on camera flash used, then that's it.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It's flash, very clearly. If the photographer says there "may have been" on camera flash used, then that's it.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It's flash, very clearly. If the photographer says there "may have been" on camera flash used, then that's it.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It's flash, very clearly. If the photographer says there "may have been" on camera flash used, then that's it.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
answered 2 hours ago
h34jhw4jh34jhw4j
91
91
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
h34jhw4j is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
2
2
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
Can't agree at all. Shadows just don't match even for a slight fill-flash, & there's not the faintest hint of a catch-light in the eyes.
– Tetsujin
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Happy Phantom is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Happy Phantom is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Happy Phantom is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Happy Phantom is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f105645%2fwhat-type-of-postprocessing-gives-the-effect-of-people-standing-out%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
its a shame that the photographer has not included the Metadata with his exports, so it is not possible to say precisely what he did, but at a guess, it seems that he has chosen a location that when coupled with a very shallow depth of field, gives an almost surreal effect. pretty much everything at subject level seems in focus and then gradually falls out of focus.
– Abdul Quraishi
yesterday
11
It looks like the people were just "photoshopped" onto a different background.
– Mike Sowsun
yesterday
8
There’s a fine line between “stand out” and “appear green screen fake”...
– Hueco
yesterday
3
The single-word answer: "Bad"
– Michael C
yesterday
2
@dotancohen I think you meant "orchard", not "orchid". It's hard to fit people into an orchid.
– Monty Harder
yesterday