Tulips are here --

[tameigh]

OK, now you got me started. I took an old pic, and used only filters under the "other" menu item



Extreme noise reduction before I started.
Ran a copy of the background image through "other->minimum" to sort of spread out the color into patches as if applied by a brush.
Found lines as described above. The technique is sort of an inverse version of standard "High Pass" sharpening.

Bingo.

The thing about using the "other" filters is that you get more control over the result.

So far I have identified three things that make a photo painterly.

- Zero noise in a painting.
- Paintings sharpen with dark(e.g. pencil lines), photos sharpen with (hopefully subtle) halos.
- Minimum unit of a color in a photo is a pixel, in a painting, it is a brush stroke. (modest simplification)

Using these observations and the "other filters", I worked out how to do the above.

Another thing... Drawings usually have infinite depth of field.

[PopsPhotos]

Katy:

I've been zipping back and forth between your first one and this one and I wonder

When I want to compare two or more photos, I right-click and open each in a new tab. Then I can click back and forth without getting crosseyed. Just a tip I've found very useful on this site.

Pops

[Wirefox]

Steve,
Elise knows that we love her work. That is not the same thing as putting her in a box. She is free to accept or reject any and all advice given here and she will still win her share of competitions. I am interested in this more from a hope of learning from her than trying to direct her down a particular path.

Tim

I understand where you are coming from. My words were perhaps a little terse now that I read then back. What I was trying to get across is that the things that make a photographer's work stand out are quite often subtleties that are easily lost if not developed carefully. I am not suggesting that Elise should not strive to move forward but photographers can try for years to develop a recognisable style that sets them apart....sometimes they never do. Elise has developed that style as a baseline which can be built upon...but carefully.

In a couple of weeks I'm going to take a little course (just four Saturdays) on botanical illustration (non-digital).

That sounds like a brilliant idea. I can see how this will help hugely in understanding which filters and textures will get the effects you wish to achieve. I have long believed that study of 'analog' art (god, that sounds terrible) can help photographers just as much, if not more than study of other photographers. Raylee introduced me to the work of a couple of Australian artists who use bold primitive form and colour. Studying these images has certainly influenced the way a want to use colour in my own images.

[wilgk]

Better? They are supposed to be old botanical illustrations --

Very special!
This one and the yellow one

[Katy Noelle]

Katy:

When I want to compare two or more photos, I right-click and open each in a new tab. Then I can click back and forth without getting crosseyed. Just a tip I've found very useful on this site.

Pops

Oh, does that work everywhere, then? One of these days, I'll understand this computer thingy. Thanks, Pops!

[Donald]

Oh, does that work everywhere, then?:

Should do.

[mythlady]

I have long believed that study of 'analog' art (god, that sounds terrible) can help photographers just as much, if not more than study of other photographers.

Steve, I really take your point here -- when I went to Open Studios last fall, I concentrated on photographers who were manipulating their work in some way, and I had this very strong realization: These people know a lot more about art, and different forms of art, than I do. This is why I've been branching out -- drawing, watercolor, and the botanical illustration class. I have some vague idea of something multimedia-ish (is that vague enough for you?) in my future, but I don't know what it is. So I'm exploring.

[Katy Noelle]

In a couple of weeks I'm going to take a little course (just four Saturdays) on botanical illustration (non-digital). That may help me move forward a bit. If I had another lifetime (and more talent), that's something I'd pursue -- there's a graduate program in botanical illustration near me, and the things they do just blow you (me, anyway) away --

Oh, I am so jealous! (Last year, my calendar was Redoute - that's how much I love those botanical prints!) In my silly thread with the bouquet of flowers, Radu-Dinu mentioned Cezanne, my portraits of my friend Kyrionna came about because I looked up at her and she looked like a Raphael (well, I first thought of a certain William Morris painting of his wife), I saw someone, in another current thread mentioning Japanese art - there's so much inspiration and so much to learn. I'm wishing, now, that I had an art degree. Happily, my sister does but I feel so guilty when I pick her brain to death. Other art mediums really, really are a springboard. It's redundant to say it but I feeeeel it.

Also, any other thought and understanding to help our intuitiveness is awfully fun. I remember when there was a word prompt for a photo challenge - "timeworn" was the word. I had such a good ol' think about it all. It was worth it just to have used my brain. I really loved the post in your blog, Elise, on tulips for the same kind of reason. (and, oooooo, I just saw your latest post - love it! =])