What are you working on (in November 2023)?

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

Attempt 2 is a bit better than one.  Stil simple. Mock-up is made by Vecton Auta via Pixabay. the background from Adrienne's AI design. 

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

1 hour ago, Sue Thomas said:

It took me longer to find a  suitable background,

Yes, the most difficult part of this technique is to find/take 2 suitable photos

[Cassel]

I think I am on a roll. Here is another one.

[Cassel]

19 minutes ago, Jannette Nieuwboer said:

Yes, the most difficult part of this technique is to find/take 2 suitable photos

That is true. I had another project to show (but that will be for Part 2) which is even more important when you consider the perspective for the photo and the "base".

[Sue Thomas]

56 minutes ago, Jannette Nieuwboer said:

Yes, the most difficult part of this technique is to find/take 2 suitable photos

Actually, for me  choosing a photo is easy, choosing a background to place the photo in  is far more difficult.  I rarely, if ever  use outside resources, other than  some elements.

[Sue Thomas]

I went back to Unsplash to find a mobile phone.  Should it ever become possible in the real world for a  Nuttall's Blister beetle  or any insect to crawl out of a phone just may scare the heck out of some people.  I added a shadow, using an opacity to match the other shadows. 

[Sue Thomas]

59 minutes ago, Cassel said:

I think I am on a roll. Here is another one.

I do like the out of bounds technique. It's a unique approach to showcasing photos. When you come to displaying the photo on a page, what would you use for  a background paper.  Personally I would keep the backgrounds  relevantly plain.  No loud patterns in other words. 

[Corrie Kinkel]

Seeing all the above OOB's I will have to go and search for some mockups that I like and that will go with my photos.

In the mean time I like to show what I have been up to with the scripting course. I have posted there my result but that is only visible for the members of the course, so I will post it here too. I have been making my first "real" script, not something for practice only. I made a postage stamp script that can use landscape, portrait or square format with a border for which you can choose the color. You can choose to have no text or with a simple text for which you can again select the color. When testing I used some X-mas related images, so I can use them this year. I have used the "ribbon tree", that Sue T has generously shared with us last year, for one of the postage stamps. Thanks again Sue! The Kinderdijk postage stamp was the one I used to code the script so I could adapt it for the other formats, colors and text.

[Cassel]

4 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

I do like the out of bounds technique. It's a unique approach to showcasing photos. When you come to displaying the photo on a page, what would you use for  a background paper.  Personally I would keep the backgrounds  relevantly plain.  No loud patterns in other words. 

I have not figured it out yet. I will wait until I have all the photos on hand to decide. I have many options:

• keeping it completely white so the focus is only on the photos
• having a random watercolor pattern to frame the frame (which might not be white either)
• using a faded/black and white version of the photos themselves (which might not always work if they don't cover the whole page
• create a small pattern from the colors in the photo

So, right now, it is still a work in progress and nothing is finalized, however, the OOB approach is getting more and more interesting now. I'll keep you all posted!

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

25 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

or any insect to crawl out of a phone

@Sue Thomas An insect crawling out seems to me to be the most difficult subject you can choose. An insect is usually photographed from above. Then it looks more like the insect has been put on it than that it is crawling out. That's not what we want. 

[Ann Seeber]

36 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

I added a shadow, using an opacity to match the other shadows. 

Sue, I tried laying a small object on the face of my cellphone and all I see is a reflection, but no shadow. 

[Cassel]

9 minutes ago, Ann Seeber said:

Sue, I tried laying a small object on the face of my cellphone and all I see is a reflection, but no shadow. 

Shadowing is tricky with that type of effect. First of all, we have to remember that it is a "fantasy" setup so it is not going to be 100% realistic. Second, the shadows will depend on the lighting you have at the time. Finally, the shadowing will depend on what we want to get, but like in Sue's example, she based her shadows on the existing shadows on the scene. Notice that the light source is not from the top left, but from the top right to match the others. 

[Sue Thomas]

6 minutes ago, Ann Seeber said:

Sue, I tried laying a small object on the face of my cellphone and all I see is a reflection, but no shadow. 

Ann, I don't quite  understand  your comment. The beetle is coming out of the phone, which means as it comes out over the phone, it's going to be  slightly raised above the surface, hence that portion of the beetle is going to possibly generate a shadow . I may have the angle of  shadow not  as it should be , but it's meant to give a little lift.  Does the beetle look as if it's walking across the  phone? I'd appreciate feedback and suggestions on this please.

[Sue Thomas]

7 minutes ago, Cassel said:

Shadowing is tricky with that type of effect. First of all, we have to remember that it is a "fantasy" setup so it is not going to be 100% realistic. Second, the shadows will depend on the lighting you have at the time. Finally, the shadowing will depend on what we want to get, but like in Sue's example, she based her shadows on the existing shadows on the scene. Notice that the light source is not from the top left, but from the top right to match the others. 

 

7 minutes ago, Cassel said:

Shadowing is tricky with that type of effect. First of all, we have to remember that it is a "fantasy" setup so it is not going to be 100% realistic. Second, the shadows will depend on the lighting you have at the time. Finally, the shadowing will depend on what we want to get, but like in Sue's example, she based her shadows on the existing shadows on the scene. Notice that the light source is not from the top left, but from the top right to match the others. 

We posted at the same time, which  meant I didn't get a chance to read your comment, before I  wrote mine.  I was about to walk away for a short while, and then come back with a fresh view on it.  Initially I tried it without a shadow, but because  the phone was laying on a table, it  benefitted from a  shadow.

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

4 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

I'd appreciate feedback and suggestions on this please.

@Sue Thomas Owww, Sue it's really difficult. I've been struggling with this today too. I threw away one after another because it wasn't right. I feel my brain cracking every now and then as I think about how things can be improved. My advice is to start simple. 

[Sue Thomas]

10 minutes ago, Jannette Nieuwboer said:

@Sue Thomas Owww, Sue it's really difficult. I've been struggling with this today too. I threw away one after another because it wasn't right. I feel my brain cracking every now and then as I think about how things can be improved. My advice is to start simple. 

I appreciate your  thoughtful suggestion Jannette.  I wasn't struggling with creating this wonderful  new approach to creating something quite unique, implementing modern technology with  photographs.   Ann's comment made me doubt  myself. Until, that is Carole replied.  

Don't give up, I look forward to seeing what else you  create using this technique.  What you have done so far is lovely.   I will suggest that you zoom right in, until you see every pixel, it  makes the job in hand ever so much easier.

[Sue Thomas]

1 hour ago, Cassel said:

I have not figured it out yet. I will wait until I have all the photos on hand to decide. I have many options:

• keeping it completely white so the focus is only on the photos
• having a random watercolor pattern to frame the frame (which might not be white either)
• using a faded/black and white version of the photos themselves (which might not always work if they don't cover the whole page
• create a small pattern from the colors in the photo

So, right now, it is still a work in progress and nothing is finalized, however, the OOB approach is getting more and more interesting now. I'll keep you all posted!

There are so many options at your disposal. For what's it's worth I like  the  thought of keeping it completely white. 

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

2 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

Don't give up, I look forward to seeing what else you  create using this technique. 

This is not the first time I have done it. A couple of years ago I did a great job in it.  it was still in the X2 .  I go absolutely further on this technique But not tonight. it's over ten here so I want to go to my bed.  Wednesday I give it another try. There are already plans circulating in my brain. Probably not tomorrow as I have other things to do. 

[Sue Thomas]

1 hour ago, Corrie Kinkel said:

Seeing all the above OOB's I will have to go and search for some mockups that I like and that will go with my photos.

In the mean time I like to show what I have been up to with the scripting course. I have posted there my result but that is only visible for the members of the course, so I will post it here too. I have been making my first "real" script, not something for practice only. I made a postage stamp script that can use landscape, portrait or square format with a border for which you can choose the color. You can choose to have no text or with a simple text for which you can again select the color. When testing I used some X-mas related images, so I can use them this year. I have used the "ribbon tree", that Sue T has generously shared with us last year, for one of the postage stamps. Thanks again Sue! The Kinderdijk postage stamp was the one I used to code the script so I could adapt it for the other formats, colors and text.

You really have been a very busy girl!  Here is that word again. Ineffable!!!!!!  From some of the comments you have made,  it appears to me that you have revelled in the scripting class, with  possibly some frustrations.  You should be proud with what you have achieved.  To top it off, I'm chuffed to bits that you have included  my ribbon tree, in your presentation page. 

[Jannette Nieuwboer]

@Sue Thomas Oww, I forgot to say thank you for the compliment. 

[Sue Thomas]

2 minutes ago, Jannette Nieuwboer said:

@Sue Thomas Oww, I forgot to say thank you for the compliment. 

My pleasure,  giving credit when credit is due.  Off to bed you go!!!

[Ann Seeber]

52 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

because  the phone was laying on a table, it  benefitted from a  shadow

Sue, that part of the shadow (on the table) looks realistic but not the shadowing on the glass of the phone. When I first saw it, something didn't seem right to me and that's when I suggested the shadowing was off somehow.

Edited November 6, 2023 by Ann Seeber

[Ann Seeber]

17 minutes ago, Sue Thomas said:

I'm chuffed to bits

Well, here's another unfamiliar phrase, though I've seen you use it before. My own take on "chuff" is the sound an adult tiger makes in greeting! LOL But here's the explanation for your use of "chuffed" - "It means ‘pleased’ but there are various different levels of chuftness:

Chuffed - standard level, mildly pleased

Highly chuffed - more than just chuffed

Well chuffed - satisfied as well as pleased

Chuffed to bits - thrilled

Seriously chuffed - said by usually men who don’t want to admit how chuffed they really are.

Dead chuffed - The ultimate in chuftness ie You couldn’t be more chuffed."

[Sue Thomas]

5 minutes ago, Ann Seeber said:

Sue, that part of the shadow (on the table) looks realistic but not the shadowing on the glass of the phone. When I first saw it, something didn't seem right to me and that's when I suggested the shadowing was off somehow.

Ah, now I understand where you were coming from.  That is  how it is in the photograph I downloaded.   I suspect that  the layout is a composition, and not an actual photo.  I wasn't bothered about that, and I wasn't going to spend time  editing  the  download.  I was more interested  in  getting the desired effect  demonstrated in masterclass. 

[Sue Thomas]

7 minutes ago, Ann Seeber said:

Well, here's another unfamiliar phrase, though I've seen you use it before. My own take on "chuff" is the sound an adult tiger makes in greeting! LOL But here's the explanation for your use of "chuffed" - "It means ‘pleased’ but there are various different levels of chuftness:

Chuffed - standard level, mildly pleased

Highly chuffed - more than just chuffed

Well chuffed - satisfied as well as pleased

Chuffed to bits - thrilled

Seriously chuffed - said by usually men who don’t want to admit how chuffed they really are.

Dead chuffed - The ultimate in chuftness ie You couldn’t be more chuffed."

Yup!   That is the right definition for all of the variations.    Chuffed to bits is the one  most commonly used, although on occasion I will use dead chuffed.