Today was a good autumn day for a walk in the park; not only was the weather nice, my son had to complete a photography assignment ("impressionist landscapes") and so we had further reason to head out.
I took three cameras with me: a dSLR, crappy camera 1, and crappy camera 2. I discovered, very quickly, that the crappy cameras lent themselves very, very well to creating impressionist photos.
This photo of the forest floor turned out particularly well in my mind. It's not quite an oil painting, still looks like a photo, but has a certain impressionist aura about it.
I rather like how this image of the pond turned out, too. The bokeh/movement was added in post processing. Normally I do not like to add effects like that to my photos, but as my son and I were discussing techniques, he mentioned that his teacher encourages the use of photoshop for this type of effect. Now, he's not going to hand in my photo, but I felt this met the spirit of the assignment that I was mimicking.
These next two pictures are of the same subject, with the same edits performed, but taken with two different crappy cameras. It goes to show how different sensors can make a difference (I will keep which photo was taken by which camera a secret, as the ultimate goal is to make an image that will be enjoyed, regardless of source). I am interested in knowing which image is preferred, however, so please do share your thoughts.
Some other pictures. Not much is needed anymore in the way of editorial; these are all pictures taken with old digital cameras, no more than 2.0 megapixel sensor in either, and edited with the Nik Collection for an impressionist effect.
(c) All images and photographs, unless otherwise specified, are created and owned by me.
(c) Victor Wiebe
(design by remyrequinart: https://steempeak.com/@remyrequenart)