Multi-colored TC sparks - colorwheel effects / Tesla Coils / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: Tesla Coils

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Multi-colored TC sparks - colorwheel effects

previous 1 2

Move Thread

LAN_403

HV Enthusiast

Tue Sept 04 2007, 12:02AM

Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068

wrote ...

Tell me, what would be hard to photoshop correctly in regard to sparks and not just coloured ones. Perhaps multiple mirrors, or a mirror ball or a mirror sphere.
I want to know what would make you think it could not have been photoshopped.

Because you said you used a color wheel.

wrote ...

I seem to recall one of your previous multilayered shots lacking saturation since sparks should saturate the exposure, not be diluted several times.

No, thats not correct. You are thinking of an OVERLAY blend method.

What i use is the LIGHTEN blend method. This takes each photo, and compares pixels between each image. Whatever image has the "brightest" pixel, is kept in the final stacked image. So the arcs themselves appear no different than if you captured them using a longer exposure. What this method does do is maintain the background at the same "brightness" as in a single image. So you can literally take 20 second exposure of arcs, but yet your background is properly exposed for say a 1/2 second image etc....

wrote ...

If I remember right, EVR used that multilayer technique *because* he didn't like the saturation (blocked-up highlights) you get from a plain long exposure.

Like i already said, it has nothing to do with the arcs and everything to do with the background. Its to prevent the background from being overexposed, not the arcs. They remained unchanged.

Also, don't put down photoshop. Almost all the techniques used in photoshop are the sames ones, albeit digital now, that have been used for decades in a darkroom for regular photography.

wrote ...

Note that these images have been cropped, resized and a mild red color cast corrected partially. They are NOT photoshopped or retouched.

Another stab at photoshop. Well, tell me, whats the difference between photoshopping color in, or using an external filter to generate the color? You are both using artificial methods to modify the
image - just at different points in the image taking process. I see no difference, and i think its a cheapshot to belittle those who use photoshop.

Personally, i think modifying an image, whether it be through creative filtering, photoshop, etc... is ethically fine, so long as the photographer states what they had done and doesn't try to pass the image as something it is not.

...

Tue Sept 04 2007, 12:31AM

Registered Member #56 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:02AM
Location: Southern Califorina, USA
Posts: 2445

Well, obviously TDU doesn't think that a photoshopped pic is as good as one made using optical tricks, so lets stop arguing and see more rainbow spark pics!

On that note, I would like to see a pic taken with a filter that has a color gradient across it, such that the sparks can be say red on one end and blue on the other, etc.

Tesladownunder

Tue Sept 04 2007, 12:44AM

Registered Member #10 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 09:45AM
Location: Bunbury, Australia
Posts: 1424

EVR,
What I was asking was whether there are some pictures that would be hard to photoshop artificial sparks in. Like sparks on a black background is easy (I presume) but sparks seen in multiple views in mirrors must be hard to get right.

Sorry I don't know the difference between blend and overlay, not having the program but I understand what you are saying.

I am not putting down the program, which I am sure is fabulous and useful. My beef is that people dismiss my stuff as " 'shopped". Everything I do is with a single photographic exposure.
It's just a standard I have set myself and I explain all my techniques on my site. Hey, even Tesla was more "advanced" when he used a double exposure.
I have never seen a photo (I think with the exception of yours or Photo forums), where the photographer admitted using Photoshop. So I ask where the honesty is in Photoshop users.

TDU

Capper

Tue Sept 04 2007, 12:51AM

Registered Member #914 Joined: Fri Jul 20 2007, 06:22PM
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 85

I wonder if you had several "ports" on the top of the coil with plastic hose running to various tanks of (non-flamable) gas, helium, argon, neon, etc.............

I wonder what CO2 or liquid nitrogen fog would look like with some arcs going through it?

I've coated jacob's ladder wires with various chemicals to get a bit of color before, has anyone coated their toroid with anything?

Too many ideas....too little time......and no money.....

Cool pictures though.

Scott

Bjørn

Tue Sept 04 2007, 12:59AM

Registered Member #27 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 02:20AM
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 2058

Another stab at photoshop. Well, tell me, whats the difference between photoshopping color in, or using an external filter to generate the color?

There is one fundamental difference. One of the methods results in a photograph and the other does not, it is partly computer generated after the fact. In some cases the difference is irrelevant or the two may even be equivalent, in som cases not.

It is not possible to define what a photograph is, in the same way as it is not possible to define how many atoms a person can carry. There is not one a specific atom that breaks your back, you are only 100% sure after you have surpassed the limit by some margin.

It is also quite simple to surpass the limit without a computer. You only need a pencil to prove that.

Tesladownunder

Tue Sept 04 2007, 01:08AM

Registered Member #10 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 09:45AM
Location: Bunbury, Australia
Posts: 1424

... wrote ...

Well, obviously TDU doesn't think that a photoshopped pic is as good as one made using optical tricks, so lets stop arguing and see more rainbow spark pics!
On that note, I would like to see a pic taken with a filter that has a color gradient across it, such that the sparks can be say red on one end and blue on the other, etc.

Quite right! Down with heathen computer tricks.
For a graduated colour on a spark look at the yellow one on the left.
TDU

1188868116 10 FT30760 Teslacolormultibilat00891000

HV Enthusiast

Tue Sept 04 2007, 02:47AM

Registered Member #15 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 01:11PM
Location:
Posts: 3068

wrote ...

I have never seen a photo (I think with the exception of yours or Photo forums), where the photographer admitted using Photoshop. So I ask where the honesty is in Photoshop users.

Standard digital workflows using photoshop are no different than the workflows you would use in a darkroom when developing film. So a digital photographer stating he/she uses photoshop would be the same if
a film photographer said the film was developed by a lab or themselves. With the exception of journalistic photos, every photo you see in every publication has been manipulated through some sort of digital workflow. Even your own work
that you submit to a magazine.

What I was saying is that if you purposely manipulate a photo by adding things like lightning bolts, cut and pasting, and things like that. Then, i feel its the photographer's responsbility to state what was done.

But for general digital workflow like levels, curves, sharpening, color balance / calibration, then thats just standard photograph tools.

uzzors2k

Sat Sept 08 2007, 08:32PM

Registered Member #95 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 04:57PM
Location: Norway
Posts: 1308

Using salts is a great way to get colored arcs. I tried boric acid on an electrode today, and it gave completely green arcs. Very beautiful, but unfortunately it seems impossible to capture with a camera. In every picture the arcs look pretty normal because of their brightness. Using a cell phone camera doesn't improve matters either. I have some saltpeter which I'll try tomorrow for purple arcs.

Salts and colors charts:

previous 1 2

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob