Silk purses and sows ears...

[finn17]

Another controversial one..possibly...

There have been a number of threads on all sorts of different forums, on all sorts of different sites, not just this one, the basic gist of which has been:

\'People can improve their scores by devious usage of image manipulation programmes, such as photoshop\'.

Often other members have responded by saying, \"OK, Show me! Post that image number etc.\"

This has always intrigued me, because it seems to me that no one has yet substantiated their argument by \'naming names\'. Such debates have been peppered with requests from people to point out the \'guilty\', but this has not been forthcoming (at least publicly).

I have been using image manipulation programmes for about ten years, not in a serious capacity and not as an \'expert\' but I would like to put my cards on the table however, and say that, in my opinion, anyone who can transmute \'lead into gold\' would be earning so much money in other fields of image manipulation, that they would never be tempted to dabble in the world of \'toy soldiers\'. (Sorry folks, but this is the pigeonhole the rest of the world would put us in).

I also believe that the amount of skill needed to perform this miracle would take longer to acquire than the necessary painting skills.

I have just been inspired by Tuubje\'s recent effort with photoshop:

Behold the crappy power that is photoshop!!

To ask the question:

Can image manipulation programmes such as Photoshop really affect a minis votes to the degree that it could be classed as, \'lead into gold\'.

Now don\'t get me wrong, obviously, photo enhancement software, enhances photographs!!! We know that!!

But, can any one post a \'before\' and \'after\' image of a \'crap\' mini that has been turned into a high ranking mini through the use of Photoshop, or any other image manipulation programme?

This is different from accusing people and asking to \'name names\'. This is a simple challenge. Become the photoshop hero. Prove a myth. Disprove a myth.

If anybody out there can do this then please let us know. We don\'t want to know how, we just want evidence that it can be done.

To make it more interesting, I will start the \'bounty\' off by saying that I will either contribute a pot(s) of paint or put $10 into anyone\'s PayPal account who can prove this theory. (I am tempted to say 1000 pots of paint or a million dollars because I think this is a relatively safe bet). It is toy soldiers however, and lets not blow these things out of proportion

Other interested parties are encouraged to \'raise the stakes\'. (offer a pot of paint/a pint of beer/a great big thank you, to the the person who can effectively demonstrate this transmutation) It would be nice to put this one to bed. One way or the other, once and for all.:flip:

 

[Flashman14]

I\'ll add $5 US to that . . that\'s 15 . . .

 

[KatieG]

Hmmmm

Heyas,
I\'m not sure you can turn a crap mini into a great one, but I do think you can turn a good mini onto a great one. I know someone who commissioned work from a top painter, and was heavily disappointed by the result (it was a decent paintjob, but no more than that)... and he thinks part of this is due to how the person in question photographs their minis. Some colors can be made to look brighter, and some blends smoother with the proper lighting or color corrections - another friend of mine played with various settings on his camera and with photoediting and was able to do something like this... I don\'t have the pics handy or I would show them... anyways, no actual \"proof\" here, but just some things to think about...
--Katie G.

 

[abstracity]

Speak up!!

Katie, tell us who the painter in question is. That way he can at least defend himself. I understand that you are making no accusations, but you obviously know something...(like the painter\'s name!!).

For my part, I use photoshop to fix up my pictures thus: I hit \"autolevels\" then I crop the picture to frame the mini better. Then I\'m done.

Do the pic\'s look better afterwords? Absolutely yes!!!! But in this case better simply means \"more like the real thing than the somewhat dark pictures my camera gives me\".

Even with superb lighting your whites will not be white, that\'s what \"autolevels\" fixes.

Do I use this to make the mini appear better than it really is? Absolutely not!!! I wouldn\'t know how to even get started at it!! I really think that Finn\'s take on this is accurate...if you can do that there\'s more money to be made elsewhere.

 

[abstracity]

One more point...

I think the situation you describe is likely to happen more and more (at least until people key in on who the snakes are...).

I am always aghast at some of the garbage I\'ve seen some lauded painters foisting off.

People buy from people who can paint really well with the understanding that that person will give them a quality piece when the deal is closed...

I think what happens is that the painters sometimes lowball the commission price, planning on doing a \"not so great piece, for a not so great price\" but fail to communicate this to their clients.

For myself, I take pains to ensure people who are not paying top dollar realize their figures will not be painted to my highest standard.

 

[supervike]

huh?

um, why is mouse wearing those pants?


Yet another good thread started by Finn17.

I will gladly put my 10 bucks into the growing bounty to \'prove the myth\' as well.

Also, I am putting up 10 dollars to prove the existance of any of the following myths...

Roswell/crashed space aliens
Bigfoot
Loch Ness Monster
A \'good\' movie starring Steven Segal

 

[mouse]

FINN17!!!

Are you instigating something by that image of a mouse in pants??!!??

PS: kidding...but that image is...er....

 

[mouse]

anyways...

computer realism is definitely possible.

The most simplistic way of achieving photo \"enhancement\" is simply to:

(1) improve brightness, contrast, levels
(2) remove scratches and dust
(3) unsharpen masking
(4) others

The more expert way of doing so can include:

(1) colour dropping
(2) surface/material creation (Eg. making fabric, chrome, dirty metal...)
(3) lighting effects

I am a software and system engineering, not a multimedia/imaging expert. But there\'re people in my line of work that can achieve this. Imagine, using a real life image, and changing their clothings and colours is a piece of cake to them.

 

[finn17]

Not guilty!!!

Originally posted by mouse
Are you instigating something by that image of a mouse in pants??!!??
PS: kidding...but that image is...er....

Mouse, you have got the wrong man!! Read the post again and check the rest of the threads. I am afraid we have both been stitched up by our good friend Tuubje:flip:

 

[Sand Rat]

My experiece with photoshop is that the kind of things that Mouse described can be done to the picture. However, those things are also easy to spot if not done properly (ie by someone who has spent the hours learning photo manipulation via photo shop) by the smoothness of the pictures - to me they just dont look quite right the images are too smooth.

 

[sippog]

Behold the crappy power that is photoshop!!

I\'ll give it a 7

 

[Tuubje]

Originally posted by supervike
Also, I am putting up 10 dollars to prove the existance of any of the following myths...

Roswell/crashed space aliens
Bigfoot
Loch Ness Monster
A \'good\' movie starring Steven Segal

That last one is the most difficult to prove...

And I also think this is a great thread, by an expert poster (kissing ass here Finn , I\'m going to need you for those pirates :innocent: )

 

[KatieG]

Originally posted by abstracity
Katie, tell us who the painter in question is. That way he can at least defend himself. I understand that you are making no accusations, but you obviously know something...(like the painter\'s name!!).

I can\'t give out that info, because it was not I who commissioned the work, and I would not feel comfortable pulling the person who did into it. Not to mention if the painter in question is a member here (not sure), I really don\'t want to start a flame war. I just want to point out that this sort of thing happens, so people who do order commission work are warned.

I also note the post where abstracity mentions he will do a not so good job for a lower price. As long as that is made clear, no problems, but apparently that is not what happened here (according to the person who ordered the mini at least - there are two sides to every story though so I am trying to be fair).

Personally, I don\'t paint less than my best on single minis (although I do sacrifice quality for speed if I am doing units), but then I haven\'t had people banging down my door for commissions either, but I would like to think I would always continue to do things that way.

Anyways, to get back on topic, I too adjust my photos in photoshop, but its the same sort of things, just autolevels to remove whatever yellowness gets introduced from my lighting and cropping then getting it to a manageable size etc. It may even be possible to inadvertantly make a mini look better than in real life simply through lighting set ups and simple manipulations in photoshop that aren\'t meant to \"make the mini look better than IRL\", but have that effect. I wish I knew how so I could improve my scores a bit But, if anything, people have told me my minis look much better IRL than on the screen, so what can you do? Well except maybe to get better at taking pictures....
--Katie G.

 

[Sturmhalo]

I think we have to differentiate between \'image manipulation\' and merely tweeking a photograph to give a more realistic image. For example, I recently photographed a mini I\'d done and had to tweek the image slightly. The photo was very nice but the colours were much stronger than those on the actual model. I could have left the image as it was and posted a \'lie\', but instead I reduced the colour saturation. That way the image appeared far more like the actual model. I see nothing wrong with people doing that!

What I don\'t agree with is people who may try smoothing out their blending or whatever. I know these accusations have been thrown around, but I haven\'t noticed anything like that actually being done. If someone were to do that then they should have their wrists slapped (with a brick!lol).

 

[freakinacage]

i dont have photoshop (which is why all my photos are soooo crap). i use ulead photoexpress - its what came with my digicam. i will agree that some simple things can be done to improve minis (i still can\'t get the bloody lighting right - if anyone wants to look at my minis and tell me where i\'m going wrong... ) but ithink if oyu have a good mini to start with, you can definately improve it.

 

[Tuubje]

What I\'ve noticed now, is that people have a \"coming out\" about using programs such as photoshop. Usually for small things as a small colour fix. Personally I don\'t see a problem with that, you try to make the mini look like it\'s in real life, no?
But can\'t anyone prove that you can make a \'6\' into an \'8\' with making blends more \'blendy\' and such? I\'m really getting curious now on the fact if this is possible. Maybe it\'s all just a myth? A CmoN urban legend?

 

[Infidel Castro]

I\'m coming RIGHT OUT...

Right, I have a dirty \'orrible confession to make and it may lose me the very small amount of respect I have in these parts...

Now you know the Tyger Lilly post I put up recently? We had problems with the mould maker and whilst making the mould it slipped under pressure, distorting the green and giving a bad master mould. However, we\'ve salvaged it to the extent that we spun off the master minis and reworked them. In painting Tyger Lilly I had to take two things into account...first the blade was bent at 30 degrees from its plane (and I mean it was like a sharp bend) as well as having a horrible metal build up. I corrected that for the paint job although you can still see the shape isn\'t perfect by the reflection it gives. The other problem was that the face slipped as well, and she had an eye that would have made the mutant from Total Recall look pretty! When painted it looked absolutely terrible and as the mini itself is due to be corrected for production I \'raised\' the eye slightly from its FREAK position to normal. I did not smooth anything or mess about in any other way (I\'m looking at you Rackham!), but I did feel it a hard issue to deal with - I\'d never manipulated an image before but I felt I NEEDED to so as to show the mini exactly as it WILL BE rather than in some twisted and \'orrible mess.

I still feel really bad about having done it, but I felt that in this case, and as a nod in the direction of the sculptor and the company (wasn\'t their fault!), the minor manipulation I carried out was, I feel, justifiable. Maybe.

Anybody wanna slate me? :|~

Was I right or wrong? It wasn\'t ratings that motivated me either. Just a desire to show the mini as it was supposed to be/will be.

Would anyone here have noticed?

Am I a stinking great manipulator?

Did I have to tell?

Am I going to have rotten tomatoes thrown at me?

Answers please...

Phil

 

[Beelzebrush]

Hi Rev

I would say that you were doing the professional thing. It is after all a product shot and that\'s what photoshop is for... it\'s a pro application that is intended to make the best of commercial pics...

no slating from me....

 

[Tuubje]

Hey rev, you\'ve been forgiven by me (that\'s in my present avatar state, I forgive everyone)

But you\'re case is slightly different I think, you made a \"professional\" decision. Now before everyone starts yelling, with professional I mean: bussiness-like, economical etc...
The company needs to sell mini\'s and since you are their painter you have to make the mini look good. In this case it was a bad mould, but since companies advertise before selling, they probably needed the mini finished. So when you touched it up it was a bad mould (as i\'ve mentioned), and the mastermould would probably get redone and the rest of the line will look nicely.

It\'s difficult to explain what I mean, but I hope everyone kind of gets the point I\'m trying to make here, if not, just flame me

 

[finn17]

This is not what I meant...

Reverend, I have looked at the mini in question and, no I can\'t tell it\'s been tampered with. I think you would need a before and after comparison to be able to do that.

Personally I have no quibble whatsoever with what you did. You were correcting for the sculpt, not the paint.

What I really want to see, is a demonstration whereby someone takes a mini which is a sound 6-7 and turns it into a 8-9 or so using image manipulation techniques. I am not convinced that this can be done without it being obvious.

Abstracity put my point more succinctly:

\"I really think that Finn\'s take on this is accurate...if you can do that there\'s more money to be made elsewhere\".

I know that if I had that level of skill with photoshop, I would not be messing about with lumps of lead. Lets be honest, even the painting \'Gods\' we all admire and respect wont be buying Rolls Royces and yachts now will they?:bouncy:

So Rev, I respect you now just as much as I did beforelol

(A lot more actually for your honesty and the real-life example you provided)