BroncoBuff

Members
  • Content Count

    178
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

169 Utility Player

About BroncoBuff

  • Rank
    *******************

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Seattle
  • Favourite Logos
    Broncos, Buffs, Nuggets
  • Favourite Teams
    Broncos, Buffs, Nuggets

Recent Profile Visitors

1,622 profile views
  1. Of course, please don't take me too seriously. Darth Brooks posted did post some very interesting, in-depth topics on the first couple pages ... but now it's been FOUR years since I first posted in here. I'm not ENTITLED to any one-on-one lessons, I know that. But there are some very talented people here ... hell, I'd be happy with a quick drive-by and a sentence or two from them. It's not just this site, I posted some of these same images on another site's "Photoshop help" thread ... in 6 months all I got was ONE post, with just ONE word: "Rasterize." I looked up its meaning, it had something to do with bitmap images. But I'm still not sure what it meant.
  2. Nuggets logo and uniform history (from two years ago obviously). Dunno what advice I'm looking for here ... the hardest part was wiping away other players in the shots - Alex English good example. Almost that entire background was imported to cover over other players. OHHH!!! Had to draw in Antonio McDyess's (#24) right arm and left hand ... that's HORRIBLE! Looks like I used the Crayola crayon 8-pack box Ok, THIS I could use real help on. It's so hard to reduce the size of images and still keep some quality ... this thing raised a very specific problem: The fingerboards of the guitars - the taper slightly narrower as you do up from the body of the guitar to the headstock. Problem is, with such small images, the taper narrows pixel by pixel, and each one is VERY noticeable. It's jarring. If you look close you'll see what I mean. Don't know what I can do to smooth out this kind of problem. I tried editing a large image, then reducing it's size ... but reducing has problems all it's own of course.
  3. Just a collection of old uniforms to prove to the youngsters that 40 years ago, not every team was either Navy Blue or Black! Not sure what kind of advice I'm looking for here ... the two images are the same, except in the lower one I enlarged Elway and super-imposed his helmet on the upper row. Don't much care for the look of that here, but expanding heads and arms outside the image boundaries worked well on the Nuggets thing above.
  4. There's lots of professionals on this site, so I'm hoping for some lessons (or at least tips) on Photoshop-ing. This is just a photo of the Saint Monica statue in Santa Monica California - (where Wilshire Blvd ends at Ocean Blvd.) I "style-ized" the photo into a Windows desktop image (tinted the left quarter for desktop icons) Of course everything from the original photo is scrubbed and cleaned - then "style-ized" - the grass, the sand, the fence, the water, the clouds. Not sure what kind of advice I'm looking for on this one. I hyper-contrasted the original photo too (obviously). .............. Good example here of something I could use help with: Truly INCREDIBLE photo (original above), but I wanted Tom Osborne CENTERED in the shot. So I expanded the left margin, then created additional "content" to fill that expansion: 1) Mostly drew in the Buffalo-handler on the left side, then blurred (and blurred and blurred) 2) #26 Cornhusker - the arm and shoulder on the left is a flipped image of the other arm 3) #8x behind #26 is a flipped image of #89 between Osborne and #26 in the original - changed the jersey number, facemask, face, mouthguard, collar. Looks pretty good, but it could be better - especially the Buffalo handler. GIVE ME SOME CLUES, PLEASE.
  5. Wow. That is so gorgeous ... ethereal gorgeous, my knees get weak. Green is my favorite color, but that goes beyond personal preferences Lots of guys here are professionals, let me throw this question out: I suspect the lighting and photo quality affected my reaction to that pic. My question is how greatly can equipment distort or misrepresent or over-enhance colors and images? By equipment I mean video card, monitor, camera, lighting. I bought a Viewsonic "Pro Series" monitor awhile back partly because it hyped its color "accuracy," etc., and although I know most ALL video cards have evolved WAY beyond what 90% of consumers need, I still buy a pretty decent one every 4-5 years. Why?
  6. Not sure if this is 'Brand" criticism or 'Identity' criticism, but these two: 1. L.A. Lakers - The franchise moved to Los Angeles in 1961 from Minnesota - land of 10,000 lakes. L.A. kept the name, the Lakers brand, despite the fact there are NO natural lakes of any note there (Silver Lake is a man-made reservoir). Nothing more than a handful of artificial aqueducts, rivers and reservoirs built to provide fresh water to residents of its desert climate. 2. Utah Jazz - The franchise moved to Salt Lake City in 1979 from New Orleans - the cradle of jazz music. Utah kept the name, the Jazz brand, despite the fact the culture there is the furthest thing from "jazzy." The radio industry has long considered the SLC market as "the place where alternative formats go to die." Tastes have expanded as the years have passed, but in the 70s the market couldn't support more than one country music radio station, much less a Jazz one.
  7. Agreed. Add LSU (purple jersey/gold pants), and Florida State. I wouldn't submit my school for best uniforms, but our logo has gotta be Top 10 at least. Throw in Top 10 stadium and Top 3 mascot, and I can live with the uniforms.
  8. SWEET SUCCESS! Audacious is the word. Acknowledging their history without derailing their present. I wouldda been good without the royal-blurple Color Rush - The navy CR is bad enough to the bone. The player's numbers on their helmets is a bold choice. Like the jersey numbers tough, a sharper font wouldda been a lot better. Helmet numbers should be slimmer, and navy blue.. This is the typeface on their 1960s helmets, The numbers were black. f
  9. Another reason the Yankees pinstripes work is their SOLID DARK NAVY LOGO. Never a problem reading that one .... meanwhile the Rockies' ridiculous outlined letters are one of the worst uniform design flaws I can think of. They couldn't even fill in the letters with a deep gray or silver, sad. But PURPLE. Are there any pro or college teams that actually wear true purple? Equal red and blue mix? I don't think so ... every "purple" is 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 mix blue over red. The Ravens, Vikings, Lakers, Suns, Raptors, LA Kings, Kansas State, Washington, Northwestern, Texas Christian, even East Carolina - NONE are even very close to true 50-50 blue-red PURPLE. Even BROWN has the Padres, Browns and Wyoming Cowboys.
  10. Okay yes ... visual flow being in some measure related to whether two specific colors blend, and complement? Definitely, I think even a slight alteration of a color can make or break a blend. A more subtle example the Buccaneers' new slightly darker red compared with their previous brighter red, and how each blends/flows with the pewter. Recently there was talk about the merits of adding gray to the Colts royal blue, and though I didn't post about it, I thought it was all about WHAT gray. For example, this Kentucky pic seems an abomination of a color relationship - its impossible to appreciate this blue with that dull near-charcoal gray. But another gray might work. Can't agree with you that the brighter Chargers colors are an era-specific style though. In fact - though I probably shouldn't admit this - the new Chargers duds are my favorite current uniforms.