Comparision of Editing

[gglankie]

Hi all, please give comments and/or vote between these two pictures (001 or 002), which editing is preferred.

001

002

 

[HTCahHTC]

ok, i prefer the edited version. btw wat was the focus at? the buildings? and the picture seemed kinda blown out to me at some points. just my two cents worth

 

[hidden3]

ok, i prefer the edited version. btw wat was the focus at? the buildings? and the picture seemed kinda blown out to me at some points. just my two cents worth

if i'm not wrong both pictures are edited. :sweat:

 

[zaxh81]

i prefer 001

 

[gglankie]

ok, i prefer the edited version. btw wat was the focus at? the buildings? and the picture seemed kinda blown out to me at some points. just my two cents worth

focus at the middle of tall building. maybe i added too much warm, dats y the picture looks blown. i will take note of this in future... thanks for valuable comments.

 

[gglankie]

if i'm not wrong both pictures are edited. :sweat:

yes both edited, but #002 only add in abit warm.

 

[gglankie]

i prefer 001

ok, tks for ur sappork..:bsmilie:

 

[Parka]

First one is better.

The increased colour saturation improves the contrast for the elements in the photo.

 

[gglankie]

First one is better.

The increased colour saturation improves the contrast for the elements in the photo.

noted, tks.

 

[Yatlapball]

I also prefer the first one... But please pull back the on the saturation for the blue channel. The sky is looking very unnatural.

 

[gglankie]

I also prefer the first one... But please pull back the on the saturation for the blue channel. The sky is looking very unnatural.

ok, will watch out for this in future.. thks..

 

[fergo]

First one is better.

The increased colour saturation improves the contrast for the elements in the photo.

yup! agree!! #001's colours are much more pleasing to the eye. #002 looks little dull.

 

[Kit]

A pointed out, 1st one is better but only in some ways. The contrast in the buildings is good but the sky is not. 2nd one is just too washed out to make the photo appear interesting. Given this, I would do a B&W conversion based on the 1st.

 

[gglankie]

yup! agree!! #001's colours are much more pleasing to the eye. #002 looks little dull.

tks for the vote..

 

[gglankie]

A pointed out, 1st one is better but only in some ways. The contrast in the buildings is good but the sky is not. 2nd one is just too washed out to make the photo appear interesting. Given this, I would do a B&W conversion based on the 1st.

tks for the input, will take note of it..

 

[Yappy]

No1 phot very rich... No2 appeared to be over exposed.

Can you get one in between?

 

[Lingkm82]

Certainly 001.... No 002 seem like normal shoot straight from camera without any filter effect (boring)...
No 001 is quite pleasant

 

[gglankie]

i will post a photo in between dull and rich soon.. for comparision..

 

[gglankie]

thanks all.

 

[boombox]

photo 2 looks relatively interesting, and it's the usual stuff you'd normally see in real life, the colours are rather neutral. all that went out of the window when you turn to see photo 1 - which seemed to have its curves bumped on the bright/dark end in comparison to photo 2.

Of course, when put together, photo 1 is the attention grabber.

Preference wise, none - if both are put together.
Photo 1 now becomes too vivid,
Photo 2 now becomes too dull,

But if you put them on their own, they both work for me.