Well I'd never heard of the Orton Effect......

[David995031]

......until I looked at Paul's excellent still life a few hours ago. I decided to look it up and give it a try. These are the pre and post Orton shots. The intention was supposed to be to create an ethereal sort of landscape but maybe I have been a bit heavy handed? Gentle criticism very welcome.

[JohnP]

Perhaps I'm a bit odd but when I take photos I try to capture the the scene the way my eyes see it and neither of these images look natural to me... Sorry David!

I have had a twiddle with the first image and it looks much better to me... I don't usually play around with the images of other members for fear of upsetting them so I will refrain from posting unless I'm asked to do so.

 

 

 

[David995031]

4 hours ago, JohnP said:

Perhaps I'm a bit odd but when I take photos I try to capture the the scene the way my eyes see it and neither of these images look natural to me... Sorry David!

I have had a twiddle with the first image and it looks much better to me... I don't usually play around with the images of other members for fear of upsetting them so I will refrain from posting unless I'm asked to do so.

 

 

 

No prob John, I am not easily moved to tears! Let's have a look.

[JohnP]

10 minutes ago, David995031 said:

No prob John, I am not easily moved to tears! Let's have a look.

It's the best I can do with a reduced res image.

[Paul]

Generally, Orton works better on landscapes (rather than still life).

I suppose nothing will replace the original 2 exposed slide methods as the man who created the Orton meant, but it is interesting to see what we others can muster.

Paul.

[Fogey]

Nothing wrong with the effect, David - I just think you have the wrong subject/scene.

[David995031]

15 hours ago, David995031 said:

Thanks for everyone's contributions. I do like the clarity of John's edit but I will play around, applying the effect to with a variety of  different images.

 

 

[Fogey]

David I have also been experimenting over the years, but using variants of the Brenizer effect.

Basically it's, depending on the scene, a mixture of focus merging to a greater or lesser degree each shot of a panorama and then stitching the whole using the Brenizer, (sort of), effect, to try to get a 3-D image.

[David995031]

2 hours ago, Fogey said:

David I have also been experimenting over the years, but using variants of the Brenizer effect.

Basically it's, depending on the scene, a mixture of focus merging to a greater or lesser degree each shot of a panorama and then stitching the whole using the Brenizer, (sort of), effect, to try to get a 3-D image.

Thanks for this, Fogey. It

 

2 hours ago, Fogey said:

David I have also been experimenting over the years, but using variants of the Brenizer effect.

Basically it's, depending on the scene, a mixture of focus merging to a greater or lesser degree each shot of a panorama and then stitching the whole using the Brenizer, (sort of), effect, to try to get a 3-D image.

 is interesting and I may give it a go although it seems pretty labour intensive. I found some useful guidance here https://bit.ly/3vsbO27. 

[MattGrey]

I quite often add it selectively to skies and water in small doses.  Can be useful on long grasses to.  I don't like it on portraits as can look a little 80s boudoir!

[MattGrey]

5 hours ago, David995031 said:

Thanks for this, Fogey. It

 

 is interesting and I may give it a go although it seems pretty labour intensive. I found some useful guidance here https://bit.ly/3vsbO27. 

If your using PS I'm pretty sure you could find a free action to download that will do the leg work for you. Luminar has it built in as a slider that you can also selectively mask.