Need some photoshop tips please

[996GT2]

For our first big project in photography workshop, we are supposed to emulate the work of a famous photographer. I'm doing Robert Mapplethorpe's Calla Lily (1984), which is linked here.

The project does not require my photo to be exactly the same; merely that the lighting and angles, etc to be very close to the original photographers so that I can convey the "mood" of the original image. Since it's extremely difficult to obtain a lily exactly like the one used by Mapplethorpe, my instructor said she would be pretty lenient on that aspect of the photo.

After some work, here's what I've been able to reproduce. This image is unedited except for cropping and conversion to B&W.

My attempt

An important part of the project is using Photoshop to adjust the image to emulate the original; I know the lighting (and other stuff) is pretty off at the moment, so any tips regarding Photoshop and how to make my shot look more like Mapplethorpe's would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: Tentative PS job which teacher seemed to like a lot. Guess I'll just work with this for the final draft.

Here

 

[troytime]

what technique did you use to convert to B&W?

 

[996GT2]

Lightroom->B&W

 

[virtuamike]

Of all of Mapplethorpe's work, you picked Calla Lily? Could've had more fun whipping it out

Look at the original and see which direction the light is coming from. Base it on the shadows. Now look at yours and see the difference. If you don't want to reshoot, then try drawing them in photoshop (personally though I think it's simple enough to just reshoot with emphasis on matching lighting).

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: troytime
what technique did you use to convert to B&W?

This can make a huge difference. There are many ways to get there.

One of my personal favorites is to convert to LAB, discard A & B channels (or move them to another document for use later; they can be invaluable adjustment masks), convert to greyscale, then back to RGB (or CMYK most of the time in my case).

A much simpler, far more elastic method is to use an adjustment layer; either Channel Mixer starting with one of the greyscale presets or the B&W adjustment layer.

OdiN has also posted a video of one of his methods here.

Once you've got a good starting conversion, use masked adjustment layers or manually paint in shadows/highlights on layers. I tend to go a little crazy with the layers, and on heavy projects it's not uncommon for me to have 30 or more layers. This, I'd imagine would end up with somewhere around 6-8 layers for me - an original, a (LAB, if it worked out, an adjustment layer if not) converted, a retouch layer, a couple highlight layers and a shadow layer or two.

I'd definitely start with a better-lit shot though. There's not much you can't fix in PS, but it's often less effort to start with a better original, if that's an option.

 

[996GT2]

Not sure if reshooting is possible right now...need to go check on the flower later to see if it's still alive. I'm thinking about just drawing the shadows and doing the lighting in photoshop.

If I re-shot what kind of lighting would I need and how should I position it? All I have is a friend and a flashlight standing in as studio lighting

 

[magomago]

from the looks of it..it looks like the lighting is coming from the top at a SLIGHT angle towards the right (if we take the pivot point from the center of the photo). there MIGHT be some passive reflection on the bottom, but i can't tell if my eyes are just being played tricks on due to local changes in contrast. Correct me if I'm wrong anyone
You also miiight want to slightly punch up contrast depending on the resulting photo, but that will depend on the type of lighting job you get done.

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Convert it to black and white using layers. Odin has a great tutorial under his Photoshop tutorials thread.

The only thing I can see different is that in the original photo the pedals of the flower are peeled back creating some shadowing that is lacking in yours.

I'd also add some noise to give the photo a rustic feel, whether through a filter or possibly even a texture layer.

 

[foghorn67]

Try using the channels to dodge/burn each RGB level. You can go silly creating new Alpha channels.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: foghorn67
Try using the channels to dodge/burn each RGB level. You can go silly creating new Alpha channels.

If you do it this way, I'd strongly suggest doing it to a copy of the image/layer you want to modify, to maintain the ability to (easily) step back.

Alternatively, when you use the Layer->New->Layer... dialog (not just the new layer button), you have the option to create a "neutral" layer for that blend mode. If you make your burn/dogde layer that way, you'll automatically maintain better undo capability. To limit the changes to a specific channel(s), double click the layer, and check which channels you want to apply the layer to.

Another bonus for using layers for the effect for me is that I find it much easier to make organic changes to the image; a sweep of a brush over the whole image that can later be masked to the areas it should affect.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: foghorn67
Try using the channels to dodge/burn each RGB level. You can go silly creating new Alpha channels.

If you do it this way, I'd strongly suggest doing it to a copy of the image/layer you want to modify, to maintain the ability to (easily) step back.

Alternatively, when you use the Layer->New->Layer... dialog (not just the new layer button), you have the option to create a "neutral" layer for that blend mode. If you make your burn/dogde layer that way, you'll automatically maintain better undo capability. To limit the changes to a specific channel(s), double click the layer, and check which channels you want to apply the layer to.

Another bonus for using layers for the effect for me is that I find it much easier to make organic changes to the image; a sweep of a brush over the whole image that can later be masked to the areas it should affect.

Agreed. Layers can be created and/or copied.
Recommended readings:
Layers

Channels

I really am enjoying these two books. They are really well done. Through a very easy paced tutorial type lesson compilation, you will grasp the big, huge world of layers and channels.
These books are by the Scott Kelby folks. Really nice people that do awesome things with PS.
Google Scott Kelby. You'll find an informative blog, and his online training site.
Neat stuff.

I going through a Channel lesson right now. He is making it easy to make hard to mask selections. That's good, because I suck with the lasso.

 

[spikespiegal]

Mapplethorpe's stuido work generally consisted of rather contrasty, side lit subjects and then printed with drastically compressed contrast on N surface paper.

Also note, he didn't do his own printing, and the 'look' of many of his subjects was actually a result of using low contrast paper - not so much his lighting.

Simple contrast masking and using a broad exposure range with digital should work.

(not sure why you picked Mapplethorpe either)

 

[996GT2]

Out of everything I could do with what I had in my doom, the flower seemed like the best choice. I basically only have my DSLR, a couple of lenses, and some filters; no tripod, no external flash, no dedicated lighting, no props, etc.

I managed to do a bit of PSing with the shadows and the detail in the stem; the instructor seemed to like it a lot in class, so I guess I'm good for this project at least.

Thanks guys

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
Out of everything I could do with what I had in my doom, the flower seemed like the best choice. I basically only have my DSLR, a couple of lenses, and some filters; no tripod, no external flash, no dedicated lighting, no props, etc.

I guess bullwhips aren't something you find just lying around

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: spikespiegal
(not sure why you picked Mapplethorpe either)

Oh picking Mapplethorpe is fine. Just with all his other work, Calla Lily isn't the first that jumps out in my mind

 

[spikespiegal]

I'm just glad he didn't choose a crucifex in urine

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
Out of everything I could do with what I had in my doom, the flower seemed like the best choice. I basically only have my DSLR, a couple of lenses, and some filters; no tripod, no external flash, no dedicated lighting, no props, etc.

I managed to do a bit of PSing with the shadows and the detail in the stem; the instructor seemed to like it a lot in class, so I guess I'm good for this project at least.

Thanks guys

It also looks like you stole the stem from Mapplethorpe's image.

The shading along the nearest parts of the flower are pleasing and pretty natural looking. Shading the bottom portion of the petal is also nice.

My only remaining criticism would be the relatively hard edge on the shadow on the top - it no longer seems correct with the position of the new lighting source.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: 996GT2
Out of everything I could do with what I had in my doom, the flower seemed like the best choice. I basically only have my DSLR, a couple of lenses, and some filters; no tripod, no external flash, no dedicated lighting, no props, etc.

I managed to do a bit of PSing with the shadows and the detail in the stem; the instructor seemed to like it a lot in class, so I guess I'm good for this project at least.

Thanks guys

It also looks like you stole the stem from Mapplethorpe's image.

The shading along the nearest parts of the flower are pleasing and pretty natural looking. Shading the bottom portion of the petal is also nice.

My only remaining criticism would be the relatively hard edge on the shadow on the top - it no longer seems correct with the position of the new lighting source.

Yeah, my teacher allows that. She even demo'd in class with someone else's photo that the shadow from the original image could be transferred to make the other student's image more closely resemble the original.

I'll work on the top part for the final print, and maybe make some changes to the stem.