3D effect, how do you do it? How does it work?

Here is a image I took that was given the 3D effect where it has no foreground. If I remember I just lens blurred the background in photoshop


http://www.freelanceshots.com/images...rcross_web.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baker

It looks so 3-D because the sun and the flash are painting the subject from opposite sides, and you can play with the ambient exposure to let your subject pop as much as you want."

---

I agree with you on that part, but I also think it doesn't only look 3D, it lookes "fake". I mean, the boy also could have been photoshopped in the image. At least, that's what I feel with these pictures. It's a personal thing. My mind probably cannot deal with strobism-photos [:^)]





At this point, Pauls theory about this 3D effect being similar to the naked eye, makes the most sense to me. I did try some this weekend. Will post them later.


Jan

Steve,


I think you've got a pretty good 3D effect with the retaining wall shot in the What did you shoot ... thread.


Paul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jan Paalman

I agree with you on that part, but I also think it doesn't only look 3D, it lookes "fake". I mean, the boy also could have been photoshopped in the image. At least, that's what I feel with these pictures. It's a personal thing. My mind probably cannot deal with strobism-photos [img]/emoticons/emotion-18.gif[/img]





At this point, Pauls theory about this 3D effect being similar to the naked eye, makes the most sense to me. I did try some this weekend. Will post them later.


Jan

---

Jan


I agree with you on this one. While the picture did have a 3D look, it really did have a created fake look. The boy was to bright to be natural. While it may well have been the effect the photographer was going for and as a potrait of the boy it may be fine.


Pauls theory makes sense, in part any way. Since this thread went that direction I have been finding myself looking at my own eyes bokeh and comparing it to what I might see on a picture. I say the theory makse sense in part because in reality as you look at somthing your perphial vision is somewhat blurred. However we actualy see and regester images in our mind in4D not 3D. When we are looking at somthing, occasionaly we will glance one way or the other and our brains will form an impresion of what the scene looks like. On stationary objects I think a little less blur than we would normaly see would be in order, where you can make the object out but its not so blurry that you can't tell what it is.


Rick

OK, I'll throw my two cents in...


Here's a few of mine - guess the focal distance in each.


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/1072.IT6Q0374.jpg[/img]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7506.Santa_5F00_Mailbox.jpg[/img]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/5557.IT6Q8493.jpg[/img]


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7612.73.jpg[/img]