Top tip! Use vignettes to enhance your photos

[DPNow]

Here is a summary or excerpt from an article that has just been published on DPNow:

This article shows you how a little darkness (or light) in the peripheries of your photo might make a positive difference. We're talking vignettes and we look at how Adobe Lightroom or Adobe Photoshop (including Elements) can be used for creating image-boosting vignettes.

Click here to read the whole article...

[John H. Maw]

Was this article given the wrong title? Should it not have read "Use vignettes to destroy your photos"? I can't understand how anyone who doesn't depend on a canine for navigation could think of this as an improvement. An impairment, yes.

Please, on a site that should be setting a good example and promoting high visual standards this sort of thing is just not good enough. Don't do it again or I will send round the taste police.

[ash]

Woooooo thats a bit harsh John, although I do think the example of the girl is a bit harsh also.
You have to remember that forums are places for people of all skill levels, and some may not no what a vignette is! Let alone how to apply it or not in your case.
Ash.

[John H. Maw]

Harsh, yes. Unjustifiably harsh, certainly not. In fact in the circumstances I think I was rather restrained (there are those who say that I should be restrained, but that's another matter). I haven't seen such an appalling maltreatment of a photo for a very long time and I can wait a much longer time before seeing another. As for people not knowing what a vignette is, I feel that is information that they can well live without.

[ash]

But if someone on the forum does not no what one is or how to apply it, then this explains it clearly, its upto the individual wether they use it or not in their own way, who are you to say how someone want's their pictures to look? Personal taste John, I don't use a vignette very often but in some pictures yes it does enhance.
Ash.

[John H. Maw]

Ash. You make some good points, but the article wasn't just saying how to do it. Read the wording again. It is suggesting that it is a good thing to do. There is personal taste and there is accepted good taste. If someone doesn't know what a vignette is then that person may well not be aware of accepted good taste either and might get the false impression that this qualifies as good taste.

Now you, or anyone else for that matter, may disagree with my assessment of good and bad taste and even think that only personal taste should apply. OK. Here's a challenge. Find any portrait by one of the great photographers that uses that technique in THAT way. Avedon, Penn (I know that Ian isn't too impressed with the work of Irving Penn), Man Ray (now there's a man who liked an effect or two), Leibovitz. Any of them. I really doubt that you will find anything remotely like that. The nearest I can think of is some quite subtle shading used by Karsh, but that is still a world away from the horrible treatment that was contained in that article.

[Ian]

OK, chaps, let's examine what I wrote and the purpose of this article!

The first sentence of the article goes: "This article shows you how a little darkness (or light) in the peripheries of your photo might make a positive difference."

In no sense do I say or imply that vignettes are a must or are for everyone.

The article introduces the concept of traditional well defined vignettes, which have been used in photographs since the advent of photography, and before that in paintings and drawings for hundreds of years.

It also highlights the very trendy use of subtle vignettes to enhance the mood of a wider range of photographs.

If you don't like the example of Lara I used in the tutorial, then I respect your opinion. Personally, I think it's OK, but much more important is the technical application of the vignette, not the actual subject material.

I have briefly looked at John's photos on his site and I don't see many images that have added vignette effects. There may be some, I just didn't see any when I skipped through them. So it seems to me that either he doesn't like the vignette style or he's not aware of its attraction. Either of these points may explain his rather strong reaction to my article!

I would be interested to know if I am close to the mark

Ian

[Ian]

Originally Posted by John H. Maw

Ash. You make some good points, but the article wasn't just saying how to do it. Read the wording again. It is suggesting that it is a good thing to do. There is personal taste and there is accepted good taste. If someone doesn't know what a vignette is then that person may well not be aware of accepted good taste either and might get the false impression that this qualifies as good taste.

Now you, or anyone else for that matter, may disagree with my assessment of good and bad taste and even think that only personal taste should apply. OK. Here's a challenge. Find any portrait by one of the great photographers that uses that technique in THAT way. Avedon, Penn (I know that Ian isn't too impressed with the work of Irving Penn), Man Ray (now there's a man who liked an effect or two), Leibovitz. Any of them. I really doubt that you will find anything remotely like that. The nearest I can think of is some quite subtle shading used by Karsh, but that is still a world away from the horrible treatment that was contained in that article.

Now this is getting petty and ridiculous. Famous photographers like those listed are artists. They create photographs that are worlds apart from personal family portraits. If you are saying that portrait vignettes are basically wrong and people should be dissuaded from using them, then that seems completely at odds with the freedom of individuals to choose what they prefer.

My philoosphy is always to persuade people to experiment and see for themselves what works for them and what doesn't. Mocking people for liking something you don't is completely wrong.

Ian

[John H. Maw]

Hi Ian. Good to see you defending your corner and you do so very well.

My intention when introducing the comparison with those photographers was to get some sort of measure of accepted taste. Of course and individual has the freedom to choose and others have the freedom to pass opinion if those choices are made public, as in an article posted on the internet.

I don't think I was so much mocking people as mocking the practice. Also, I don't think I accused you of saying that applying vignettes was a "must". I accuse your article of promoting (just check the title of the post) something that I consider is generally accepted bad taste (hence the reference to masters of the craft).

I'm impressed that you took the time to look at my web site (was this in search of vignette abuse?). Yes I have been aware of the practice for many years and have even taught it (accompanied by the suggestion not to use if of course), but as you remark, I have not used it on any of my photos. I do, however, often turn the lens vignette correction off in the RAW converter. I rather like the organic vignetting that the lens gives and find that, for me, it works with many subjects (but clearly not all).

In the days of the darkroom there used to be a practice known as "edge burning". This was a subtle darkening of the very edges of a print by giving extra exposure. The aim was to "hold the viewer's eye" while being otherwise undetected. It wasn't the same as a subtle vignette but had similarities. The practice seems to have disappeared with the darkroom.

OK. Maybe it is time to come clean. There was a certain degree of placement of tongue in side of mouth. I fully expected a flurry of people accusing me of being a visual snob (I have no defence against that one) and a complete sheep's rear end (little defence against that one too, if truth be told). However, like many people who read the content of this site, I am very passionate about photography (the visual arts in general) and the way it is used and I had a very strong reaction to the content of that piece. Having a pompous rant made me feel a lot better. I hope you don't mind.

I look forward to your next article with enthusiasm. How about one on applying the page curl effect.

All the best.

John

[devilgas]

Originally Posted by John H. Maw

said lots of relevant stuff

then negated it all with...

Originally Posted by John H. Maw

How about one on applying the page curl effect.

why the sarcasm john?

granted, this thread exists to discuss the article, however let's keep it civilised eh?

shoot me. i use vignettes. sparingly and in context, but i use them. not to the extent that ian showed in the first image of the article, but more as an edge darkening excercise. it's personal taste. just because someone doesn't like something, that doesn't make it wrong.