Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Is this top rated NS photo 'shopped?

profile picture
black
Posts: 208 - Karma: 250
I love this photo but now I'm starting to suspect they just selected the background and put some gaussian blur on that shit
look at the slope below the rail, and then the background. The DOF just seems a bit weird

what does NS think?

https://www.newschoolers.com/memberphoto/564614.0/Laax-sunset?s=191517&o=8
Click for larger image

and to anyone who says who cares, sorry, I'm just curious
Jan 21 2013 7:31PM
1 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Digital photography requires photoshopping in order to even be usable. It being photoshopped means nothing.
Jan 21 2013 7:32PM
0 0
profile picture
gravel
Posts: 5479 - Karma: 41,493
this is one of my computer backgrounds, and i never really considered that, but upon closer inspection, i do believe that you are right.
Jan 21 2013 7:32PM
0 0
profile picture
edai
Posts: 4983 - Karma: 4,632
Haha wasn't really too hard to tell. Look at the angle of the lip to the rail and then at the background and then at the slope below the rail like you pointed out. Muy contrast.
Jan 21 2013 7:43PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,385
It's either a background that was placed in there to make it cooler, or it's a really bad DOF blur effect.
Jan 21 2013 8:15PM
0 0
profile picture
DrZoidberg
Posts: 5674 - Karma: 4,227
It looks like he tried to fake dof, but he just selected everything above that slope at the bottom and the mountains above the foreground on the bottom right of the photo. I can't see the full size for some reason.
Jan 21 2013 8:55PM
0 0
profile picture
troupe
Posts: 549 - Karma: 4,624
I am also curious:

Click for larger image


Jan 21 2013 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Sklar
Posts: 8863 - Karma: 31,577
Definitely real...
Jan 21 2013 11:39PM
0 0
profile picture
IanAvery-Leaf
Posts: 9926 - Karma: 9,343
I think the backgrounds real and completely in focus in the original pic, and like OP said, some bad blur effect was added over everything
Jan 22 2013 8:39PM
0 0
profile picture
De-Clan
Posts: 1920 - Karma: 3,696

def photoshoped no doubt about it

still looks dope

Jan 22 2013 9:23PM
0 0
profile picture
fitzcarraldo
Posts: 218 - Karma: 63
what a joker, I can't believe anyone would do that.

pls rate my fronty i did this morning xoxox

Click for larger image


Jan 23 2013 10:33AM
0 0
profile picture
zbphoto
Posts: 7789 - Karma: 12,037
Click for larger image
Jan 24 2013 11:59AM
0 0
profile picture
black
Posts: 208 - Karma: 250
yeah but was the photo "unusable" before the fake blur was added? Why is this this drastic digital change to the photo mean "nothing" when it completely changes the look, in a fake way
Jan 24 2013 8:12PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Because the half of the digital photography process is done on a computer. You take raw sensor data and use software to control that data. The idea that digital photography can be some sort of organic process in which software doesn't play a monumental role is asinine; if photoshop makes it fake, than digital photography as a whole isn't "real" photography, which I'm sure you'll disagree with.
Jan 24 2013 8:27PM
0 0
profile picture
B.Aussie
Posts: 5851 - Karma: 4,522
Why would you even think that's shopped?
Jan 26 2013 7:32AM
0 0
profile picture
MaxBerkowitz
Posts: 440 - Karma: 2,611
um well the jacket colour obviously is over saturated....
Jan 26 2013 12:04PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)