My grandfather showed me how to find four leaf clovers when I was 7 (coincidence?), so those are real. The hard part is shooting them fast enough because clover wilts in just a few minutes and then they won't stand up for the backlighting.
The trick here is the workflow: duplicate the image and convert one to grayscale with lots of contrast and detail, then hit it with a crosshatch filter to make the strokes (I tore one of the leaves on the last clover to make the drawing "incomplete"). Paste the original on top (in RGB mode), then erase the top layer at varying opacity to make the transition (FWIW, THIS is what it looks like with only the selective desaturation and USM).
I used a strong monolight at a distance behind the clover to backlight them and throw shadows and texture on the paper. A lower-strength light and reflector were placed in front for fill.
Additional processing: Levels, Channel mixer for saturation, clone small imperfections on clover, burn existing shadows on left and dodge them on right (to help the illusion of dimension), shift color of pencil and skin slightly, spot saturation/desaturation, USM and added vignette.
I hope this does better than my LAST Lucky 7 entry! ;-)
Statistics
Place: 2 out of 98 Avg (all users): 7.3490 Avg (commenters): 8.3438 Avg (participants): 7.1930 Avg (non-participants): 7.4148 Views since voting: 12917 Views during voting: 457 Votes: 192 Comments: 94 Favorites: 37 (view)
The Site Council is well aware of challenge deadlines, and most editing questions are answered within a few hours. That was more than enough time for this Speed Challenge. Borderline cases that require discussion take longer, but that should also serve as a warning that you're close to the limit.
This image is another sample of your great creativity.
I have been very much intrigued by the unanswered question arrised by senor_kasper in regards to how you were able to verify with the SC "well ahead of time" in a 24hr speed challenge.
On the other hand, bearig in mind you are a member of the SC, I think it should be very appropriate for you to provide an explanation asap.
Cool, real 4-leaf clovers. I found my first one when I was 4 (coincidence?) and have found hundreds, maybe thousands since, even in a park in Paris. Havn't heard of many folks who can see them, but seen many try.
Can't say as it's brought me much luck, I think you found all the lucky ones :)
Love your work!
Is that not: "us(ing) distortions to create new effects or radically alter objects" ?
..........More to the point- I did exactly what I would encourage anybody to do if in doubt: submit it to the site council well ahead of time and ask for opinions. ;-)
I just read this thread and became aware of the little controversy originated by metatate's questions. The above statement by scalvert begs the question: what exactly does 'well ahead of time' mean in a 24 hour speed challenge like this?. I personally had an experience where validating one of my pictures during vote took the council several days. I know of at least another member who could not get an answer, prior to posting, for 4 days. Perhaps scalvert could inform us of the method used to check on this picture well ahead of time.
Shannon,
I've been looking at the thumbnail for days and never bothered to open it. So glad I finally did. This is super! Your creativity continues to astound me. Nice work!
I get a yard full of 4 leaf clovers every spring. Most are gone now because of the heat. You just have to know which variety of clover to look in. Judging by the leaves on your colver, you have the same ones I do.
Anyway, congrats on yet another ribbon. It's always a pleasure to see your creativity.
Congratulations once again :)
One of my favorite concept shots. When I first saw this I thought the last 4 where printouts of a shot and the first few where real and you may have blurred the shadows a bit to make them look smoother on paper. Always fun to try and figure out the making of, of a shot. The final result is what counts.
Shannon, obviously your idea for this challenge, like most others, kicked some serious butt so I'll just PM you my rebuttal which tears apart your seriously flawed reasoning. :P Again congrats on your 600th ribbon!
Congratulations on a red and an excellent photo. You constantly amaze me with your creativity and your photographic and processing talent. Now, are you going to reveal the secret of finding 4 leaf clovers? I spent a lot of time looking for them in 3 leaf clover patches as a child and never found one! I had to fake them with a 3 leaf clover and glue for the 4th leaf.
Do we really want to discourage efforts like this example from graphicfunk simply because it could be done with a filter in photoshop?
Artwork backgrounds are AT LEAST as controversial (trust me). I only used the technique here because the objects were separate, and I asked the Site Council for opinions to make sure it was OK before I entered. If it had been a single object as in Graphicfunk's entry, I wouldn't have tried it since that would require arbitrary effects within the object. The effect itself isn't even all that heavy since most of the lines were part of the leaf structure and visible in B&W (see the leaves on the left side). You could almost do this with B&W conversion and USM alone. In this case... could I desaturate an individual object in Advanced? Check. Could I apply a filter or texture to an individual object in Advanced? Check. I merely carried that through to more than one object. Heck, I even put a reflector on the right to minimize the shadows on the hand side photographically.
I'm sorry. I love your work and you're arguable the most influential person on this site. That's what makes this image ("luck of the draw") controversial. The entire "magic" here is a result of post processing. Do we really want to discourage efforts like this example from graphicfunk simply because it could be done with a filter in photoshop?
...wouldn't the end result change the "typical viewer’s description of the photograph"?
Wouldn't the same be true of a series of objects going from color to B&W? Yet we all know selective desaturation is allowed. You're forgetting the context of the rule you quoted: "...use ANY editing tool to move, remove or duplicate any element of your photograph that would change a typical viewer’s description." No objects were moved, removed, or duplicated within the photo.
Is that not: "us(ing) distortions to create new effects or radically alter objects" ?
Nope. The clovers aren't distorted. No object or sense of motion was created and nothing significant was removed. Selective desaturation is a common technique on entries, and filter effects and textures are common, too (though usually ineffective). More to the point- I did exactly what I would encourage anybody to do if in doubt: submit it to the site council well ahead of time and ask for opinions. ;-)
Those tools are fine but wouldn't the end result change the "typical viewer’s description of the photograph"? In other words, my description of this photo is an illustration becoming real. Would I hold that same description if I saw the original?
Is that not: "us(ing) distortions to create new effects or radically alter objects" ?
Nope. The clovers aren't distorted. No object or sense of motion was created and nothing significant was removed. Selective desaturation is a common technique on entries, and filter effects and textures are common, too (though usually ineffective). More to the point- I did exactly what I would encourage anybody to do if in doubt: submit it to the site council well ahead of time and ask for opinions. ;-)
So your grandfather was a leprechaun. Who knew? Congrats on your 600th ribbon!
ETA: Huh. I guess I was fooled too. I thought it was a printout out re-photographed. I didn't think you could create the illusion of it coming to life after the fact but I guess that's part of the grey area in the rules where it's subjective?
So this is a photo of a photo + the hand, correct?
No, it's not. It's a photo of seven clovers and my hand, with a PS filter selectively applied (basically selective desaturation + a texture). Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Interesting take on the challenge. The negative space on the top does not really contribute to the image. A different arrangement and a closer crop would be better in my opinion.
Seriously? How cool is this? Very modern MC Escher feeling this shot gives off; that deserves nothing less than 10. If I had to nit pick about anything on this shot I would have to pick the vignette is a little too strong IMHO.
what a creative and fabulous idea! this is a very neat shot that i'm still trying to completely figure out.. the shadows/lighting is brilliant! thumbs-up!!
Luck of the Draw
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
