I think that this is a very interesting discussion. Personally I hate all those effects that people come up with where the object is rainbow colored and the background is in blinding contrast. When I take screenshots I take a natural approach but from an angle that gives it a better appearance than a casual shot. Below I used a genade detonation to get the lighting. I think this kind of affect is appropriate beacuse it merely highlights certain areas. In this shot I was able to capture the details on his face. The right side (his left) looks very bruised and gives the shot a dark/ominous tone. His expression seems somewhat detached and is not focused on the gun he is firing. He is not angry as shoots and I think that this combination is interesting For this shot I decided to take the warthog from a side view beacuse it shows the panels inside the vehicle. The driver looks almost real and it reminded me alot of those short live action films. I was also able to align the mud splash effect to make it look like the tires were really causing it. The gunner is not firing at this moment which is good because otherwise, the flash would detract from the rest of the shot. It is overall pretty balanced and I am pleased with the outcome. Here I didn't even use any effects and just wanted to get a decent shot in campaign. The environment is really nice and by getting the shot from the ground it opens everything up, giving it a much deeper scope. The angle also gives the viewer a view of the control panel, which is surprisingly detailed I hope this helps support the potential in "Natural Shots"
What your doing is just basing it on your opinion. Lots of people prefer the new effects over the older ones and some people like you prefer the older ones. As a screenshot taker i prefer the new ones because it brings a certain feel to me unlike the older effects. It's all based on opinion thats all like for example some people like dogs and some people like cats it just their opinion. : ] i said a smart thing
I've seen a lot of well thought out points of view, and some points that are blatantly ignoring other people's arguments. Personally I think a balanced mix of some highlight effects as long as overall position and material take precedence over the effect. when ever I try to take screenshots I try to incorporate the two. Most of the time I go back into matchmaking films or test films and find good shots in the midst of all the fighting. I did the exact thing with these shots I found during various films. Most are probably from my map Scyphozoan, but some are from when I hosted TGIF. All of these were taken during real games, none were setup Not too many effects here except the glow of a regenerator. The pose and the subject material says it all. My shot was about Envy. That's clearly illustrated with the body in the background and the natural posture of the person with the skull. You begin to get a sense of conflict, which is what what focus of the screenshot. This one was just a glow effect to add some darkness and contrast to the picture. Without the Spartan there would be no point to the picture. Without the effect you still have the shot, but not the dark atmosphere that came with the effect. This picture relies more heavily on the effect, because the source of the effect was the focus of the shot. No effects, just a straight up shot of the battle field. The players moving around make the shot what it is. Without it, there would be no shot, just an empty map overview. The lighting is the natural light in Foundry, and the explosion. The explosion acts as a radiating focal point of the picture, it draws your eye in and makes you see it's influence of the rest of the picture. Not too many effects in this one either. The way the players are setup and silhouetted against the natural light of battle is the only effect in the picture. What I am trying to show is that effects don't make the shot, they enhance it. Without them pictures are just as good, with them they can be better. But there's a threshold hat shouldn't be crossed when taking a picture. Effects should only be considered if you have pose and position already setup. The people in the picture should provide a certain flow that mere explosions and filters can't. If you can take the figure out of the screenshot and the effect is still the focus of the picture; you've done something incredibly wrong.
@ Crooked You obviously have no idea what I am talking about. There are several framing techniques and guidelines to follow when taking screenshots/photographs/video. One I mentioned was Rule of Thirds, which was well explained by Black Theorem. Here is it displayed in Crank's Blizzard. You can see how the image is divided into 9 reasonably equal sized spaces by 6 intersecting lines, 3 horizontal and 3 vertical. Now, let's analyze this. First, take notice of the alignment of the Spartan's Visor and the top most horizontal line. The eyeline of the Spartan is 2/3rds up the screen, and that is often a very common placement of a person's eyeline in photography. Also notice how the head is fit in the 2nd square. Now take notice of the body. The focus of the Spartan's body fills up 2/3rds of the left side of the frame, while the remainging 1/3 to the right is taken up by the background. Notice how all these things line up with the "Rule of Thirds". But their is other methods of framing. When framing, following the rule of thirds works, but it is not necessary. The thing to keep in mind about framing a shot is to make it feel natural. You shouldn't even notice the framing it should be so natural. Now, the one that I said is poorly framed is this one. The Spartan takes up half the screen, the other half is left blank. The viewers vision is split 50/50 between the Spartan and the Background. Even though the subject is the spartan, the viewer will still glance at the remainging 50% of the frame looking for something more. There is nothing there, the frame is half empty. This detracts from the screenshot as a whole, because if you just shaved off that other half you wouldn't be missing anything from the frame. The Spartan will remain within the guidlines of the Horizontal Thirds. However, if the background was more interesting this wouldn't be so bothersome (then again, it depends what was in the background) because then you could have Depth of Field. However, the background is apart of the effect, so that wouldn't work. That is why I suggested moving in with the camera, capturing the upper body of the Spartan so that it filled 2/3rds of the left of the frame. It would be far more pleasing to the eye, and the background wouldn't be quite so distracting with the Spartan being the dominating element of the composition. Also, I very muched enjoyed RivalMass's and Kumquat's examples, especially this one. Screenshots of natural scenery can look quite amazing, and in this new world of effects, I feel as if their beauty has been lost. My argument is not against the use of effects however, it is their importance. In the comments I quoted on Page 4 they all mentioned the effects, or lack there of, instead of the screenshot of as a whole. While it is fine to comment on the effects, you should be focusing on more than just the effects. At the same time, if a screen fails to contain any effects, do not rate it down because of soemthing that isn't there.
Thanks, xX5w33ny70ddXx. didn't feel like making pics. Back On Topic: Do you take pics for other people to enjoy? Or do you take pics for your own personal enjoyment? The answer to that solves the Effects issue. The correct answer will only apply to yourself. It won't apply to everyone else.
What you are saying is that all pictures must be centered and the head in the second box. Now let's relate that to famous pictures. Richard Dawkins "I Believe" is off center. Henry Ossawa Tanner's photo "The Annunciation" are two famous photos that are definitely not in any way in the 'form' you say it must be in to be good. How come they are famous paintings then? Now, my point is that what you are saying does not fit EVERY pictures or photograph like you say. So in the case of the one you say is not correctly frame, I feel is in the perfect frame. It captures the picture to highest quality. And it is definitely not 'blank' as you would say on the other side.
Screenshots and photographs need to be balanced. That's what Sweeny is saying. If you read it it clearly states that.
I think I got that. and I disagree with it completely but not for every photo. some pictures look better off center. It is just there nature. I just proved it with the two examples I provided in my post above.
Crooked, please read what I say or get the **** out. If you bothered reading what I had to say, maybe you'd pick up on what I quoted and made real noticeable. Now, if you read past that, you'd see why I provided a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why the screenshot in question had poor framing. However, one thing I did leave out (though you probably won't read it anyway) for I feel like it will fly over everyone's head, is in the world of film, the camera is a character itself. While shots/framing/composition should all feel natural, resulting in a more appealing picture, the framing can affect the mood just as much as everything. Why do you think there are Close Ups, Wide Shots, etc.? Because they all evoke different emotions. Now, if framing 50/50 in that screenshot added emotion to the screen, that would be fine, but it didn't. It detracted, and distracts the viewer with empty space that fills up the same amount of space as the subject.
If you give me until tomorrow I could but right now I have loads of homework that I am working on. You can look them up by their name in the meantime if you want.
Are you completely oblivious? In my most recent post I talked about how shots/framing create mood. For me, due to the wide shot and open space in combination with the subject's facial expression, the emotion of this work embodies the sense of an open state of mind of provoked thought. In addition, I may not know much about the painting or the painter, but the light to the left side of the screen is as much a part of the scene as the woman, and she is looking at it.
Wow. I am not even going to explain any further if you cannot comprehend what I am saying. Single mindedness FTW I guess if you cannot handle other opinions.
No, I understand what your saying and I agree, not everything needs to be centered, but that isn't my argument here. You started by saying that I believe EVERYTHING must follow the "rules of thirds" or be centered, and I never once said such a thing. You appear to barely read my posts, and you keep saying the same thing over and over again. Now, we're getting offtopic here talking about bullshit like this, so I suggest we all get on topic, or there will be more of what wiggums got.
that is a perfect example of getting off topic, as Sweeny just said. My opinion on this, is that Effects can change the feeling/mood that a picture gives you. If you saw a pic of a spartan, just standing there, you would be confused on the point of the picture. With effects, the picture that was once a spartan, is now a spartan with an awesome greenish/any colour mist/effect around him, giving an abstract feel to it. Abstract pictures are like mini-puzzles for the eyes. They are fun to look at, and to explore. Now, this does not mean that any picture with effects are better then their non-effected counterparts, but it does mean that it MAY give a different feel, and possibly an overrall better picture. Many pics have made it onto bungie Favorites without effects, but just as many have made it that have them. Most of the non-effected pics that are viewed most commonly are funny, or show something bizzarre, or rare (like those STUPID recon messages I get all the time), while the pictures with effects/filters are more comprised of action, or abstracticity, and have a more serious feel. In conclusion, I predict/bet that If the Best effected pic (if there was one) and the best non-effected pic (again, if there was a widely excepted one,) and they were compared, and voted on throughout everywhere, The one with effects would be the victor.