Titanic Colored Photo For Sale


Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brian R Peterson

Guest
Hi All,

I have made several prints of this work and will be offering them for sale on E-Bay and other means.

I have achieved a level of realism that equals or surpass those I have previously made, this photo resembles that of a Autochrome.

Contact me if you are interested.

s19.photobucket.com/albums/b184/Hangman_Heydrich/?action=view&current=TitanicdockedatSouthamptonb-1.jpg

Best Regards,

Brian
 
Apr 27, 2007
62
0
96
Hey, looks good.

But I have to say, even though it does actually look good when seen for the first time, the red hull is quite a bit too strong and sticks out of the image alot.

The funnels actually look really good!
Overall it's an good job but my eyes keep on seeing the huge amound of black and white which I assume is from the original b/w photo?

Also, I've seen you site quickly and must say several of the interior over-paintings further down on the site looks good! More than good!

Best of luck with any future works
happy.gif
 
B

Brian R Peterson

Guest
Emil,

It is an overcast day in the B&W photo, the grey sky is appropriate and the shade of red I used is no different than that of Ken Marschall paintings.

Brian
 

Eric Longo

Member
Aug 13, 2004
888
3
183
Hi Brian,

Very nice work, but Emil is correct. Even if that is "Ken Marschall" red, you should be using "Brian R. Peterson" red in this image. Ken's anti-fouling red was chosen for whatever circumstances existed in his particular painting, and he then modulated that color yet again to allow for weather and reflected light when he painted it so copying it now is pretty senseless. You appear to have used one color all the way down. The stack color contains too much green and grey and appears incorrect - looks tinted. The sky contains no visible color at all - find that in nature. The water looks like a 1930's Kodachrome - too much "red" for one. Also, you are neglecting to convey volume by choosing not to render the air and water vapour between the viewer and the other end of the vessel same 850 feet away. You have also ignored all reflected light. Please take these as suggestions, not criticism.
happy.gif
I have taken the liberty of adjusting a sample of your water to give you an idea of what I mean. Click the links below - made using your image and 2 seconds of Photoshop. You mentioned the look of an Autochrome - I linked to one below with the water sample so you can see what one looks like. Your image looks more like a tinted b/w postcard - the colors are a little garish. The b/w/grey that Emil refers to is in the sky - and it is a cold b/w grey - that does not occur in a natural sky - grey can be made with orange and blue for example and modulated with "pink" for lack of a better word. I suggest observing more natural colors at different times of day. Please take these suggestions with the good intentions they have been made with.
happy.gif


Water

Dufay Autochrome



Best,
Eric
 
B

Brian R Peterson

Guest
Well Eric, since you basically critisised the entire piece, if you think you can do a better job of my work, please do so. Now I remember why I quit posting here
 
Apr 27, 2007
62
0
96
Brian, that's the last thing you need to do. Eric was very kind and I would've been very glad to have received that kind of feedback on my older renders.

Eric had some very concrete suggestions which are right and should add another level of realism to any b/w images etc.

While I might have reacted a little bit like you Brian on my first comments (critics) for my 3D images, I realized that I was wrong cause it only helps me and not the other way around. ;)

While I'm fascinated and inspired by Ken Marschall's paintings I realized even I couldn't use his ways but had to apply my own ones to actually make it look the way it should, so use Marschalls painting as inspiration and not use them literally ;)

So both mine and Eric's post are meant in a good way ;)
 

Sam Brannigan

Member
Dec 20, 2000
904
15
263
Eric and Emil,

Couldn't you just have said it was a very nice picture and an extremely good effort - which it is?

Great job, Brian
 
Apr 27, 2007
62
0
96
Sam, you should read quite a bit more carefully before writing that, your words make no use without doing so.

And yes, it was an good work/effort, and you should see some of his other works on his site, there are some which are exceptionally good but feedback is something each artist should get, for good or for improvement.
 

Eric Longo

Member
Aug 13, 2004
888
3
183
"Well Eric, since you basically critisised the entire piece, if you think you can do a better job of my work, please do so."

OK, here. I did this quickly from your scan - made to look like a slightly faded 1950's Kodachrome slide taken on an overcast day. It is far from perfect. I was only trying to help you with your work with my suggestions you know. I know very little about Titanic so forgive any color errors etc..

You said you were going to be selling your version on eBay - what is the copyright status of this photograph?

Best,
Eric

R.M.S. Mauretania: Farewell to the Tyne

R.M.S. Mauretania: The Centennial of her Launch
 

Eric Longo

Member
Aug 13, 2004
888
3
183
Hi Again,

I must say - this is, I believe, the first time I have tried this "tinting" for realistic effects and I am sure it shows, but it is loads of fun! I may try a white Mauretania at 108!
happy.gif

A bit of selective focus goes a long way!

Best,
Eric
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,665
880
563
Easley South Carolina
>>Now I remember why I quit posting here<<

Brian, if I may, when constructive criticism is offered, make use of it. It's a good rendering but this gives you an opportunity to make it better. Make the most of it.
 

Jim Kalafus

Member
Dec 3, 2000
6,113
37
398
Brian; Let me preface this by saying that my intended tone here is NOT intended to mirror that which I have been using on the "movies" threads of late. If I may- I studied under a watercolorist for years, who relentlessly drilled the concept of creating a work that feels "united" into my head. That is to say, all of the elements of the finished piece should flow together to suggest that they all exist in the same place at the same time. Many artists become proficient at creating water, creating ships, creating skies, but can never pull the elements together so that they harmonize.....the effect created is that of a field of water that, somehow, looks solid; with a ship that looks like it is either perched atop it or cutting through it like a knife through frosting, set against a sky that looks like a backdrop. In short- it looks like a collage of separate elements, rather than a moment in time captured with paint.

What you need to do is soften the "line" of the red paint. As it is, it looks like a solid platform atop which the hull is balanced. It separates ship from water. The upper half of the swath needs to be softened a bit. Viewed from ten feet away the definition would be razor sharp- at this distance it would not be. As Eric Longo said, you must add reflected light at the waterline that did not register in the 1912 photo. This will make the ship "part of the water" and vice versa.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads