some flowers turned into oil paintings in gimp...

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

shot with the 50mm f1.8 Hexanon

original shot, jpeg from the E-PL2, focus not ideal with only a thin slice in focus

P5283349 by ramcewan, on Flickr

Oil painting filter applied to raw and cropped;

P5283349_oilified by ramcewan, on Flickr

This seems a fun and interesting way to turn a shot with missed focus into an interesting image. All the other major software has similar effects.

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

another pair, this time shot with the jupiter-8

out of camera JPEG

P5263317 by ramcewan, on Flickr

Oil painting version (also boosted saturation) from the raw

P5263317_oil by ramcewan, on Flickr

mo · Expire: 2016-07-30

Not bad,are you using the free version of gimp?

Lena · Joined: 24 Apr 2012 Posts: 495 Location: Pl

I played with this filter too, gives interesting results especially with landscapes Smile

eddieitman · Joined: 12 Apr 2011 Posts: 1246 Location: United Kingdom

Works well on the 1st image, not sure about the 2nd one, seems oversaturated in some of the pink areas.

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

If I put side by side the original photo and the "oil" version, I choose the original photo 100% of the times.
Oily effects always feel like a diminution of the original to me.
Besides, especially the first one is a very good photo.
I can't see the reason to make up a beautiful 18 years old girl
If instead you take a 60 years old woman, I can see a reason for the makeup Wink

Kram · Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR

+1

Just looks like cheap digital wankery. Why not learn how to paint?
Laughing

skida · Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:53 am Post subject:

mo · Expire: 2016-07-30

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

kram and skida,

thanks for stopping by and sharing your opinion. If I may;

1. This is not a one-click effect (at least not in GIMP), it takes trial and error tweaking of the settings and what not, to describe it as a "one-click effect" is neither accurate nor informed. It also shows that you have never tried these filters or else you would not speak in such an ignorant fashion of the effort that goes into one of these.

2. Likewise who gave you the gavel and told you to judge what is art? There are those would say that there is no art in taking a photograph with a digital camera, those who would say there is no art in using a film camera, etc. They like you are locked in a box of your own construction looking down upon others and telling them what they do is not art. Please give it a rest, art is creation and your unkind words do not take that away.

3. Ditto the "digital wankery" comment. To some people everything done with a digital camera is "digital wankery", but only those who are unable to see beyond the box they drew for themselves come out and say it.

4. I personally find that there is something interesting in this process in the deconstruction of the digital image into it's colors and shapes. Perhaps you are too busy taking pictures of brick walls and marveling at the sharpness of your lenses to notice a picture is so much more than the rendering of ever finer detail?

SonicScot · Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 3:03 pm Post subject:

I have no idea how much work went into achieving this effect, be it 1 click or 1000 clicks, but I think the point is irrelevant. The fact remains that a reasonably pleasant picture has not been improved, IMHO quite the opposite. (sorry)
Again, I don't know how much time was spent doing this but there are plenty of 1-click effects on mobile apps which give the same results and none of them will ever win awards.
I don't think Kram and skida were being deliberately rude, neither am I, and surely you would prefer people here to be honest in their opinions rather than lie to you.
Smile

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

I like the effect you've achieved in #1 but #2 is too over-saturated for my taste. I've seen landscapes subjected to this sort of treatment and some are very well done resulting in a watercolour effect which I like. (I'd love to be able to paint but I can't - therefore I depend on software to give me the results I want).

nemesis101 · Expire: 2015-01-22

Is there a paid one? I thought it was 'free as in beer' under the Linux /GNU GPL....

skida · Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 7:00 pm Post subject:

No sarcasm was intended in my post and I am sorry that you took it that way. However it was a sincerely expressed opinion. I did try using GIMP a while back but found it not very user friendly - if you get results you like out of that program then you have my respect.

My "one click" comment was based on my experience of effects filters in PS Elements, where I tried something similar with some of my shots.

BruceB · Joined: 28 Feb 2009 Posts: 32

One of the best functions of PhotoShop IMO is the ability to "fade" any applied effect if I feel it's too strong - and often I do. My experience with special effects is that sometimes a smidgen can enhance a finished, posted photo.

I don't know if GIMP has a similar "fade" edit function or not. Smile

ramcewan · Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 198 Location: New England, USA

skida · Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:59 am Post subject:

And I in turn should apologise for my too brief comment, which was made after seeing similarly treated photos in a certain "lifestyle" retail warehouse on sale for stupid money.

I think the treatment you did works best on number one and the result could be useful as a picture for the wall.