Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Heard" data-source="post: 1543708" data-attributes="member: 7280">Ouch. That would not endear me with GIMP at all...I think my largest airbrush for when I'm doing average sized images in PS is around 45, made about as soft as I can stand so that its more atmospheric than anything else. I generally try to bump everything I'm spending any amount of time on to at least 200ppi, if I'm pushing it in increments from a screen resolution up that high, or 300ppi if I've got the luxury of scanning something myself. Always bump in increments, because sometimes when you give the computer the lump task of figuring out turning too few pixels into too many the whole thing gets...ugly. In PS there's probably an action that does it somewhere to download, but I've never looked for it.I'm going to see if I can't find out where I downloaded those tone palettes from and if I can't I'll just recreate them and send them a little later on today. edit: Here they are at <a href="http://www.retouchpro.com/pages/colors.html" target="_blank">http://www.retouchpro.com/pages/colors.html</a> Note: Even when I'm going to eventually turn something into a more non-realistic PS coloring I sometimes go through the trouble of doing it first in realistic color. It's easy to 'washes' and 'glazes' pretty experimentally in PS because you can just adjust the color layer as you like afterwards anyways. Then you can tweak things, but unless you're going grayscale I think a lot of times it's just easier in digital work to start real and work backwards because that's the closest to working with photos. YMMV.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Heard, post: 1543708, member: 7280"] Ouch. That would not endear me with GIMP at all...I think my largest airbrush for when I'm doing average sized images in PS is around 45, made about as soft as I can stand so that its more atmospheric than anything else. I generally try to bump everything I'm spending any amount of time on to at least 200ppi, if I'm pushing it in increments from a screen resolution up that high, or 300ppi if I've got the luxury of scanning something myself. Always bump in increments, because sometimes when you give the computer the lump task of figuring out turning too few pixels into too many the whole thing gets...ugly. In PS there's probably an action that does it somewhere to download, but I've never looked for it. I'm going to see if I can't find out where I downloaded those tone palettes from and if I can't I'll just recreate them and send them a little later on today. [I]edit[/I]: Here they are at [URL=http://www.retouchpro.com/pages/colors.html]http://www.retouchpro.com/pages/colors.html[/URL] Note: Even when I'm going to eventually turn something into a more non-realistic PS coloring I sometimes go through the trouble of doing it first in realistic color. It's easy to 'washes' and 'glazes' pretty experimentally in PS because you can just adjust the color layer as you like afterwards anyways. Then you can tweak things, but unless you're going grayscale I think a lot of times it's just easier in digital work to start real and work backwards because that's the closest to working with photos. YMMV. [/QUOTE]

Verification