• Members 46 posts
    Feb. 1, 2025, 3:17 p.m.

    Playing around with the 'Adamski' effect, looks interesting and worth exploring

    GFXS0106_1.jpgBraunton Adamski.jpg

    GFXS0106_1.jpg

    JPG, 101.7 KB, uploaded by AndyG on Feb. 1, 2025.

    Braunton Adamski.jpg

    JPG, 75.8 KB, uploaded by AndyG on Feb. 1, 2025.

  • Feb. 1, 2025, 9:35 p.m.

    Its where the horizon or back bit of the photo is deliberately blurred

    [And I had to look it up - not something I'd come across.]

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 1, 2025, 10:55 p.m.

    Indeed, for those on Facebook search for Josh Adamski. Some is quite good, apparently it sells well, can be over done though. It works best I think when it's subtle rather than in your face

  • Members 793 posts
    Feb. 2, 2025, 8:21 p.m.

    It's pretty much an identified (not always sharp) subject - and motion-blurred everything else. Not just backgrounds.

    A personal style that, of course, has been pounced on by everyone and over done. In true Internet fashion.

    In landscapes/seascapes, it's still good form to keep horizons straight, no matter the "special treatment."

    😉

    Rich

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 3, 2025, 8:20 a.m.

    And yet, me and the others commenting obviously hadn't seen it, and really was the last comment necessary?

  • Members 793 posts
    Feb. 3, 2025, 5 p.m.

    ??. What's with the sensitivity?

    I was just making an honest observation. I'm used to easy flow of comments here and honest exchange of opinions. After all, it is a site about images.

    As I said, among photographers, a straight horizon is considered important in landscape shots. The most frequent response when a crooked horizon is pointed out, is a good-natured, "oops."

    Sorry you have such a thin skin.

    Rest assured, I'll just ignore any future image posts of yours.

    Rich

  • Members 793 posts
    Feb. 3, 2025, 5:56 p.m.

    😔

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 3, 2025, 9:55 p.m.

    I'm perfectly calm. Sometimes we make editing mistakes... bet I'm not the first or last one to do that when we use mobile platforms, sorry

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 3, 2025, 9:56 p.m.

    No problem 👍

  • Members 27 posts
    Feb. 4, 2025, 12:15 a.m.

    Nice lines. My 2c would have been a tighter crop for a bigger "floating human".

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 4, 2025, 4:30 a.m.

    Braunton Adamski-1.jpg

    Like this? I'm probably too invested in the original to have taken that step, in as much as I saw the person and the image was what it was and I kind of like the proportions, but I get what you are saying

    Braunton Adamski-1.jpg

    JPG, 16.5 MB, uploaded by AndyG on Feb. 4, 2025.

  • Members 27 posts
    Feb. 4, 2025, 8:43 a.m.

    Yeah, pretty much.
    I left the bottom alone because the lines contribute and hit the sides and top.
    What you need now is some metallic brushes for that Robot sheen !

  • Members 1033 posts
    Feb. 4, 2025, 10:12 a.m.

    I like this cropped version better.
    It demonstrates the Adamski effect more clearly.

    Thanks for this OP , I'd never heard of that effect before, always good to learn new things :-)

  • Members 46 posts
    Feb. 4, 2025, 12:56 p.m.

    👍