Professional Painting Contractors Forum banner
21 - 30 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Underdog said:
Thank you, that's too cool.
I'm going to a Photoshop class tomorrow morning. I'm gonna figure out if this teacher is a match for me to take private lessons.
I turn mural art into wallpaper and am trying to figure out how to make designs myself.
Up to now I just do cheesy editing like in my intro for laughs, but I have potential if I had a mentor 'cause I hate to read manuals.
I hang wallpaper on my desk top :)
I have PS elements, it's a lot of fun making good work look better, or even making bad work look good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
I have PS elements,…
…or even making bad work look good.
Damn. I've been rumbled.:wacko:

:)

___________

OK, let's open a can of worms.

There is only one rule of design - and even this doesn't apply to interior decor work.

If the work is in any sense professional, never, ever ever use clip art. Clip art is for school projects or church notice boards or organizing your recipes and knitting patterns.

Pictorial elements should add to - or be - the message. They should not ornament it gratuitously. Of course there are all sorts of woodcuts of cartouches and frames and Vistorian oddity, and I think these may be regarded as an extension of typography rather than clip art per se.
Arabesques and curlicues are not illustrative, they are decorative and as such are the subject, not ornaments to it. Their use is legitimate, particularly in interior design.

Let's not confuse clip art with symbols
Symbols are O.K. for labeling restrooms, first aid points, fire exits and corrosive substances. They're great for road signs or where a visual shorthand is called for. Normally they are instances of something pre-learned easily recognizable. There's no point in re-inventing a facebook symbol or a trade association stamp for your business card or web site, for example. That's not clip art.

This is:
Sticking a "logo" on the side of your van or in a trade directory that's a pictureof a generic tradesman. It's well naff, and anyone doing it should be spackled with a wooden spoon till they cry.

It's something that crap printing houses persuade customers to ruin their ads with. It's cheaper than hiring a professional designer and of course, a picture must be worth a thousand words.

Last year I had a business directory in my mailbox. It was printed with patchy grey ink on bog-roll.
There were maybe a dozen Indian restaurants and takeaways in it.. half of them tarted up with the same line drawing of some beturbaned days of the Raj wallah holding a tray of exotic munchables... Car dealers are all selling the same BMW. The plumbers round here all seem to employ the same grinning cartoon character brandishing a plunger.. and you already KNOW what was happening with the painters and decorators, I'm sure.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

</can of worms>

stands back and waits for the flames
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Mr Heavy said:
Damn. I've been rumbled.:wacko:

:)

___________

OK, let's open a can of worms.

There is only one rule of design - and even this doesn't apply to interior decor work.

If the work is in any sense professional, never, ever ever use clip art. Clip art is for school projects or church notice boards or organizing your recipes and knitting patterns.

Pictorial elements should add to - or be - the message. They should not ornament it gratuitously. Of course there are all sorts of woodcuts of cartouches and frames and Vistorian oddity, and I think these may be regarded as an extension of typography rather than clip art per se.
Arabesques and curlicues are not illustrative, they are decorative and as such are the subject, not ornaments to it. Their use is legitimate, particularly in interior design.

Let's not confuse clip art with symbols
Symbols are O.K. for labeling restrooms, first aid points, fire exits and corrosive substances. They're great for road signs or where a visual shorthand is called for. Normally they are instances of something pre-learned easily recognizable. There's no point in re-inventing a facebook symbol or a trade association stamp for your business card or web site, for example. That's not clip art.

This is:
Sticking a "logo" on the side of your van or in a trade directory that's a pictureof a generic tradesman. It's well naff, and anyone doing it should be spackled with a wooden spoon till they cry.

It's something that crap printing houses persuade customers to ruin their ads with. It's cheaper than hiring a professional designer and of course, a picture must be worth a thousand words.

Last year I had a business directory in my mailbox. It was printed with patchy grey ink on bog-roll.
There were maybe a dozen Indian restaurants and takeaways in it.. half of them tarted up with the same line drawing of some beturbaned days of the Raj wallah holding a tray of exotic munchables... Car dealers are all selling the same BMW. The plumbers round here all seem to employ the same grinning cartoon character brandishing a plunger.. and you already KNOW what was happening with the painters and decorators, I'm sure.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

</can of worms>

stands back and waits for the flames
Umm...ok
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.


Mr.H., I wholeheartedly agree with you, but I guess the sad reality is most people will allow price to play a major role in their decisions.

Recently, I commissioned a friend of mine, a painter and illustrator, to come up with an illustration for another business I am involved in. I told her exactly what I wanted, of course told her I was paying her for it and guess what? I got 8 sketches 2 weeks late and not one met the criteria I outlined. (She in the past had done a few small jobs for The New Yorker, fully capable of what I asked). I found exactly what I needed on a clip art site for $20.00!!!

I have been known to on more than one occasion tell potential customers that a faux marble baseboard is a waste of money-better to install the real deal. Woodgrain the walls of a public building? Not a good idea, but cheaper than the real wood and installation.

Money wins.
 

·
Time Traveler
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
OK, let's open a can of worms.

</can of worms>

stands back and waits for the flames
I do nothing but smile as I read this thread, terribly interesting to me.

You've embarrassed me though. This is what is on my estimate sheets:



Which makes no sense. I'm a paperhanger and never use a tray.
I'm going to correct that.


I do photography as a hobby and I use PS Elements for my photography and my work to make pictures look better.

Here's the link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/developing
Very entertaining site. Beautiful images!! Love to talk to you more about your photography. And photo editing,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
I do nothing but smile as I read this thread, terribly interesting to me.

You've embarrassed me though. This is what is on my estimate sheets:



Which makes no sense. I'm a paperhanger and never use a tray.
I'm going to correct that.




Very entertaining site. Beautiful images!! Love to talk to you more about your photography. And photo editing,
Absolutely anything you want to know, I know this may seem off topic of paint talk but i cant tell you how many times I've seen portfolios of tradesman and their work, and i know the work is good but the pictures just don't quite do it, and most of us don't have a professional photographer to take to each job to take pictures of our work.

So it really helps to have that knowledge to be able to take quality pictures of your work to add to your portfolio or your website.
I have a good SLR camera and photo editing software that i use, but sometimes you can run photos from your phone through post processing and still get good results.

I can show you how, in fact maybe I should just start a new thread on project photography.

BTW, regarding your Logo, dont feel bad because my logo is tiles of primary paint colors, which doesn't have much to do with painting either, but I think a logo should be unique and it doesnt always have to relate to the type of business, look at McDonalds, what do Arches have to do with hamburgers and food? nothing, but the idea is you can take away the name and still know it's McDonalds by the Arches, that's called "logo recognition"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 · (Edited)
I do photography as a hobby and I use PS Elements for my photography and my work to make pictures look better.

Here's the link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/developing
Some great - pretty - landscapes there. I'd say roughly 70% of your pictures are close to 100%. That's close to perfection, really.
So what more do you think you need to get from Photoshop?

My advice (feel free to ignore it - you didn't ask for it and it's a little presumptious of me … my advice, as a user of PS since 1980-something and a camera since before I could spell "cheese," is this.

Forget the software for a while. Do all your editing in the moment before you press your shutter. Own the moment. Print - to screen - without cropping. This is easy with digital. When I was a little chap, and every shot had to be carefully taken on a mercury-fumed glass plate before the ether in the collodion evaporated and then developed in in a bath of neurotoxic carcinogens in pitch dark while juggling a thermometer and blah blah blah yakkety schmakketty and I said to Abe Lincoln drone drone ummm blah...

…well, I was brought up to think every finger press counts, and to take the time there and then. I spent years in darkrooms, printing black and white photographs and I was not averse to manipulation at that stage, but that was mainly to persuade the large dynamic range of film to exploit the limited range of a reflective surface - the final print - and of course that translation was not always linear. Things would be brightened up, darkened down into new relationships with surrounding objects. With digital workflow, there isn't the same sort of involvement with the commited-to subject. It's as easy to change something as to render it well. At this point, the work ceases to be a photograph. It becomes something else - an image based on a photograph. Your philosophical involvement with that thing you are now producing is not for me to question, merely for me to point out your own need to examine. For many purists, a photograph is drawing a frame around a piece of "out there" so it's forever.
What you have is often not what's out there, but inside yourself. I'm not saying it's not valid, just that I think you have something to explore that's in maybe a different direction from where you thought you needed to be going.
If that was unwarranted, please forgive the intrusion.

What I'm doing isn't photography, of course. More often than not there is no "original" at all other than what pours out of my fingertips. Sometimes I use photography within a wider creative process. What you're doing, I suspect, isn't that. You are essentially using PS to improve your photography - but at some point, it's no longer photography, and I think you want it to be.
It's not a criticism, just something you might want to think about.

You've got some nice technique there, though, and _often_ you have the thing I've been trying to qualify. :thumbsup: Thanks for sharing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
Absolutely anything you want to know, ...
...I can show you how, in fact maybe I should just start a new thread on project photography.
I think I'd subscribe to that. You've obviously got the technique to handle/lead it. Good idea.
BTW, regarding your Logo, dont feel bad because my logo is tiles of primary paint colors, which doesn't have much to do with painting either, but I think a logo should be unique and it doesnt always have to relate to the type of business, look at McDonalds, what do Arches have to do with hamburgers and food? nothing, but the idea is you can take away the name and still know it's McDonalds by the Arches, that's called "logo recognition"
Correct.

I think the tray is fun, btw. Would it occur to most people that it's irrelevant?
Oh, going against my rant earlier slightly. If Mrs. Customer is looking for your paperwork in a sheaf of invoices and foreclosure demands, she's going to be able to identify it at a glance - at least ss far a s "Here's a tradesman's piece of paper!!" It does nothing to identify you as who and what you are, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Mr Heavy said:
Some great - pretty - landscapes there. I'd say roughly 70% of your pictures are close to 100%. That's close to perfection, really.
So what more do you think you need to get from Photoshop?

My advice (feel free to ignore it - you didn't ask for it and it's a little presumptious of me … my advice, as a user of PS since 1980-something and a camera since before I could spell "cheese," is this.

Forget the software for a while. Do all your editing in the moment before you press your shutter. Own the moment. Print - to screen - without cropping. This is easy with digital. When I was a little chap, and every shot had to be carefully taken on a mercury-fumed glass plate before the ether in the collodion evaporated and then developed in in a bath of neurotoxic carcinogens in pitch dark while juggling a thermometer and blah blah blah yakkety schmakketty and I said to Abe Lincoln drone drone ummm blah...

…well, I was brought up to think every finger press counts, and to take the time there and then. I spent years in darkrooms, printing black and white photographs and I was not averse to manipulation at that stage, but that was mainly to persuade the large dynamic range of film to exploit the limited range of a reflective surface - the final print - and of course that translation was not always linear. Things would be brightened up, darkened down into new relationships with surrounding objects. With digital workflow, there isn't the same sort of involvement with the commited-to subject. It's as easy to change something as to render it well. At this point, the work ceases to be a photograph. It becomes something else - an image based on a photograph. Your philosophical involvement with that thing you are now producing is not for me to question, merely for me to point out your own need to examine. For many purists, a photograph is drawing a frame around a piece of "out there" so it's forever.
What you have is often not what's out there, but inside yourself. I'm not saying it's not valid, just that I think you have something to explore that's in maybe a different direction from where you thought you needed to be going.
If that was unwarranted, please forgive the intrusion.

What I'm doing isn't photography, of course. More often than not there is no "original" at all other than what pours out of my fingertips. Sometimes I use photography within a wider creative process. What you're doing, I suspect, isn't that. You are essentially using PS to improve your photography - but at some point, it's no longer photography, and I think you want it to be.
It's not a criticism, just something you might want to think about.

You've got some nice technique there, though, and _often_ you have the thing I've been trying to qualify. :thumbsup: Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for the compliment and the criticism, very true!! I did start in the film era when each shot counted and now with digital and 10 gig chips I have become careless, a good picture requires very little post processing, some call it cheating, I say it's simply making a photograph as good as it can be.
 
21 - 30 of 30 Posts
Top