PDA

View Full Version : Help me confirm I am not losing my mind...




iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 02:26 PM
Which one of thes images looks most natural/best corrected to your eye. No comments on composure etc. (I didn't take the image). Just tell me - one, two or three.

Thanks.

http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6B97386C1611DA.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6BAACA6C1611DA.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6BB8BD6C1611DA.jpg



liketom
Dec 13, 2005, 02:29 PM
number 2 looks better from my amature non camera knowledge eye's;)

amacgenius
Dec 13, 2005, 02:30 PM
Without knowing any background, I'm going to go with #3.

mkrishnan
Dec 13, 2005, 02:30 PM
One, I think? Primarily judging from the fact that the sky is quite overcast and the brightness on the foliage and buildings doesn't seem right in that environment.

I hope I'm not confirming any insanity plea. :(

zelmo
Dec 13, 2005, 02:31 PM
I'll go with #2. It is the only one in which the clouds looks natural to me.
Of course, i have 1/4" of dust on my monitor, so I may not be the best judge.;) :p

liketom
Dec 13, 2005, 02:32 PM
:D we all picked 1,2,3 lol iGary IS loseing his mind

devilot
Dec 13, 2005, 02:36 PM
I like #2. :o Edit: I'm on my 12" iBook... I'll let you know later when I'm on my iMac. :p

Artful Dodger
Dec 13, 2005, 02:38 PM
Art major answer is...#2 looks like a nice day...not great but a nice fall day. So water will be darker, grass not as green but lighter in color and the color of the trees looks just right.
Give us 3 pictures of you and we can give you your crazy answer ;):p :p

Lau
Dec 13, 2005, 02:42 PM
I'd say 1, just to add to the confusion. Sorry!

It looks like the least washed out, with the best contrast. I'm viewing it on a laptop screen which is very unreliable for colour and brightness though.

mkrishnan
Dec 13, 2005, 02:43 PM
Heh...now that I'm looking at this %$#$ thread more, I'm not so sure anymore. So I chose the first picture because I thought the sky was foggy and overcast. But there's a hint of bright blue in the sky that doesn't make sense. Then, on the other hand, the air is certainly not dry and clear, judging from the level of hazing and blurring of the distant land. I dunno anymore. If there was moderate cloud coverage, I'd have to switch to #2. :D

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 02:44 PM
I'll comment when we get about 6 more answers. That is a good enough group for me, and then I will explain the situation.

EGT
Dec 13, 2005, 02:45 PM
One looks most natural.

-hh
Dec 13, 2005, 02:47 PM
On very first look, I thought that both 2 and 3 had a loss of color in comparison to #1 ... and would have picked #1.

But in going over it a second (and third and fourth) time, I do think that #1 is a bit too blue/dark, so it could use some amount of lightening up. I'm just now sure that I would go as "far" as what's in 2 or 3. Their loss of any significant color in the sky puts me a little off.

Between 2 and 3, I'd say that 3 looks a bit too light - - a loss of some contrast? - - and prefer 2.

So between these available choices, I'd go with #2.


-hh

CanadaRAM
Dec 13, 2005, 02:50 PM
2 and 3 look artificially brightened; at least on my Win machine Dell FPW2005

I don't expect such bright sunlight in the fall in a temperate zone.

#2 is more pleasing because it's brighter, but for me not as realistic. The detail in the landing stage area on the left looks blown out in 2 and 3

Artful Dodger
Dec 13, 2005, 02:58 PM
Save this Q for later iGary but will #1 print darker than it's showing? Hard to stick with #2 with the light/dark print issue in mind (my own mind that is).

doucy2
Dec 13, 2005, 03:02 PM
#3 looks right to me
but i'm no pro

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 03:02 PM
OK.

#1 is the one I received in from the photographer.

#2 is my corrected version.

#3 is how my client thinks I should be correcting these images - with the highlight and shadow tool.

That said, I can't correct to #3. It looks blown out, over saturated and, well, not real. Sure, it's more "bright" and "colorful," but I correct my images to look as natural as possible. And sometimes I have to blow out areas of the image to give the whole image a better appearance.

My customer has not been happy with the last four sets of discs I sent in. The comment I get back is "I just used the highlight/shadow tool and I think it looks much better." I have not changed what I have been doing for four months.

Well, that really stings a bit because I spend hours making these photos look as natural and REAL as possible. Now I am at a loss. I basically told them that I didn't think #3 looked natural, but if that is what they want me to do, then so be it.

I just don't like doing something that goes against my every instinct as a photographer. Ugh.

Now this could get ugly. If every time the images come in, the client just applies a 60% highlight adjustment and that's what they like, they could get pissed and can me...I think they just started playing in Photoshop a bit and that's becoming dangerous.

At a loss what to say/do. :(

iDM
Dec 13, 2005, 03:07 PM
Hmmm from my very unprofessional opinion, 1 looks too dark like it was taken through a rain cloud on an overcast day, in 3 the whites look to white and too bright they are so brigth in fact you loose alot of the details on some of the white boats and especially on that white home/building in the center.

I am for the second one (2)

AHHH I swear i wrote that before reading your explanation iGary!!!

mkrishnan
Dec 13, 2005, 03:18 PM
I just don't like doing something that goes against my every instinct as a photographer. Ugh.

Ugh, I'm sorry, babe. :(

It sounds as if your client wants a certain end product, in terms of bright, highlight images. And tweaks them with PS to get this look, even though it is not suited to the original image (I'm with you...I "guessed wrong" initially, but there's no way I can see #3 being the right answer). Is there any way to work with the client, so that they can take the right photo in the first place, that is suited to the look that they want, so that you can give them what they want and have it be right for the image? Like having the client take pictures at a different time of day, etc, etc?

I dunno...it sounds hard. It'd be nice to make it into a win-win situation, so that the photographer is taking the right pictures, you're doing the right adjustments, and your client gets the right image for their needs.

zelmo
Dec 13, 2005, 03:18 PM
iGary, I appreciate your problem, I really do. Your integrity as a photographer/artist is being challenged, most likely by people who don't know 1/100th what you do about photography or PhotoShop.
Sadly (for you), they are the ones paying the bills.
i think all you can do is explain why you correct images the way you do, point out the problems you are seeing in their corrected examples, and ask them for guidance. If you can't teach them (meaning they don't want to learn) the error of their ways, you're going to have a decision to make.

Hmmm....is that dual G5 paid off yet?

simie
Dec 13, 2005, 03:22 PM
Perhaps your client needs his or her monitor calibrating, then they might see things your way or even their eyes testing.

Number 2, definitely is the best picture.

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 03:24 PM
iGary, I appreciate your problem, I really do. Your integrity as a photographer/artist is being challenged, most likely by people who don't know 1/100th what you do about photography or PhotoShop.
Sadly (for you), they are the ones paying the bills.
i think all you can do is explain why you correct images the way you do, point out the problems you are seeing in their corrected examples, and ask them for guidance. If you can't teach them (meaning they don't want to learn) the error of their ways, you're going to have a decision to make.

Hmmm....is that dual G5 paid off yet?

That's basically what I did. I corrected image #3 to their "specs" and asked them if that is the benchmark they wanted me to go by. No answer yet. I did tell them that #3 look to saturated, had a real lack of shadows and just doesn't look right. I just wanted some confirmation. I could have done some better work to #2, but #3 is just hideous, IMO. I even had a couple of my photographer buddies look, and #2 is what they agreed on , too.

Luckily, the retainer for this project paid for the G5 and the goodies. :)

I don't think I am getting canned, but we are definitely having difficulties communicating. Just applying a 60%/10% shadow highlight adjustment isn't the cure all to haze and unerexposed images. They think it is, and there is a definite tone of "are you really paying attention to what you are doing." They're great people, I just don't know what changed all of the sudden.

*shrug*

Hopefully we work it out.

sjl
Dec 13, 2005, 03:38 PM
OK.

#1 is the one I received in from the photographer.

#2 is my corrected version.

#3 is how my client thinks I should be correcting these images - with the highlight and shadow tool.

That said, I can't correct to #3. It looks blown out, over saturated and, well, not real. Sure, it's more "bright" and "colorful," but I correct my images to look as natural as possible. And sometimes I have to blow out areas of the image to give the whole image a better appearance.
[...]
Well, that really stings a bit because I spend hours making these photos look as natural and REAL as possible. Now I am at a loss. I basically told them that I didn't think #3 looked natural, but if that is what they want me to do, then so be it.

I just don't like doing something that goes against my every instinct as a photographer. Ugh.

For what it's worth, I find #1 to be the most pleasing to my eye. #2 I can accept, although there's something about it that doesn't look right to me (no idea what, just a feeling). #3 looks far too washed out; there's no way that I'd consider that a good image.

For instance: at the bottom left corner of the image, there's a mast of some sort (maybe a transmission tower?) I can make it out easily in the first image. The second image, it's visible, but a bit harder to make out. The third, it's next to impossible to see -- only its shadow tells you it's there.

Another point: the blue van or shed, about halfway up the image, roughly a third of the way in from the left hand side. First image, it looks completely natural. The second and third, it looks like it's a refugee from a creche ... and has been out in the sun too long.

Ultimately, if the client's paying, they're the ones who make the decisions. But at this point, I'd suggest trying to educate them. Maybe point out similar points to the ones I've made above -- look for solid reasons why the correction is misguided, and hopefully they'll listen. I don't know them, so I'd suggest not saying "this is wrong", but rather "this is misguided, because ..." Don't make them feel like you're putting them down, and you'll have a better chance.

(I had a minor argument with a friend over an image I shot; he said it was too soft, and I agreed, but I have a dislike of sharpening filters in Photoshop and similar -- I'm very sensitive to the banding that they can produce. He pointed out that the 20D has an antialiasing filter built in that tends to oversoften images ... I guess I need to play around with image correction and try to get a feel for what's good and what's excessive.)

Good luck.

Lau
Dec 13, 2005, 03:43 PM
Hopefully we work it out.

Hope you do too.

If the day was reasonably bright, I would say #2 looks fine as as well. (I'm not just saying that!). #3 is definitely too bright, in my (amateur!) opinion. :o

One thing I have found, is those sort of aerial shots often look quite washed out and flat, and you wouldn't expect the same bright colour and contrast in one as you would a more close up shot. Taking that into consideration (and the bright sky) was what made me like #2 on reflection.

Mitthrawnuruodo
Dec 13, 2005, 03:48 PM
Like #2 and #3 much better than #1, that's easy.

Then to choose between #2 and #3 is harder. I would say the sea in front looks better on #2, but I like the colours of the forest better on #3... would probably use #2, though, unless you're going to crop away much of the sea...

Edit: Then I read the rest of the thread (:o), and specially which versions are which, and I still think the forrest is a bit better on #3, but that #2 is better overall... :)

numediaman
Dec 13, 2005, 03:50 PM
The correct answer is always "whatever the client wants", until you can drop the client.

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 04:40 PM
The correct answer is always "whatever the client wants", until you can drop the client.

Of course it is, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't going crazy.

Lacero
Dec 13, 2005, 04:43 PM
I like 1.5, if such photo exists.



Here's to the Crazy Ones, like iGary http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)

Lacero
Dec 13, 2005, 04:50 PM
http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6B97386C1611DA.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6BAACA6C1611DA.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/garybooberry/.Pictures/Photo%20Album%20Pictures/2005-12-13%2012.23.53%20-0800/Image-3E6BB8BD6C1611DA.jpg

--------- 1.5 ---------

http://www3.telus.net/poojja/photo.jpg

Does this look better a little bit?™

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 04:53 PM
Yes, send me the batch action. I do 600 to a thousand of these a day.

garyreich@mac.com

:D

Lacero
Dec 13, 2005, 04:56 PM
Yes, send me the batch action. I do 600 to a thousand of these a day.
Erm.. I just used auto levels. :)

Command+Shift+L the first pic
Here's to the Crazy Ones, like iGary http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=35452 (http://www.uriah.com/apple-qt/movies/think-different.mov)

iGary
Dec 13, 2005, 04:58 PM
Looks to saturated on my screen.

Bah!!!

Yes, my monitor is calibrated.

*goes off to lose mind*

Rocky3478
Dec 13, 2005, 06:53 PM
1.5 definitely has my vote..... ;)

Applespider
Dec 13, 2005, 07:03 PM
I think I'd go for about 1.75. 1 looks like it just came out of a camera; pleasing but lacking punch.

3 is hideous; way, way too bright unless you could see a blue sky and sunlight on the water and even then you'd be pushing it. The colours just don't look right.

I thought 2 looked a little bright until I saw 3, hence going for about 1.75-1.8. I think the 1.5 is still lacking punch and I'm assuming the client wants the fall colours.

g^3
Dec 13, 2005, 10:56 PM
IMO the second one looks the best and most natural. The third is the worst. Here's my attempt at color correcting.

atari1356
Dec 13, 2005, 11:38 PM
On my screen, number 1 looks the most natural. 2 and 3 look a bit washed out, and the highlights appear too bright (blown out a bit).

Applespider
Dec 14, 2005, 03:19 AM
I've just opened this thread on my Windows PC at work with its crap screen.

On this one, 1 looks way too dark, two looks OK and 3 looks more like 2 did on my Mac. Perhaps if your client is looking at it on a Windows PC with an uncalibrated screen, he thinks 3 just looks punchier.

Sun Baked
Dec 14, 2005, 03:21 AM
I'd say the 1.5 looks a little more natural.

1 was a little to dark and muddy, and 2 was a little too bright.

Edit: And I too think you are losing your mind ...

mad jew
Dec 14, 2005, 03:21 AM
I've just opened this thread on my Windows PC at work with its crap screen.

On this one, 1 looks way too dark, two looks OK and 3 looks more like 2 did on my Mac. Perhaps if your client is looking at it on a Windows PC with an uncalibrated screen, he thinks 3 just looks punchier.


Yeah, my iMac says 1, my iBook says 2 and my PC says 3. :(

atari1356
Dec 14, 2005, 09:00 AM
Yeah, my iMac says 1, my iBook says 2 and my PC says 3. :(

My 15" PowerBook says 1, and my 20" iMac at work says 2.

nospleen
Dec 14, 2005, 09:44 AM
iGary, are they printing these when you send them in? If not, what kind of display are they using? Maybe it is the display and not your work. BTW, I agree two is by far the best. One is too dark, two is natural, three looks like I did it. :D

Malfoy
Dec 14, 2005, 09:56 AM
I like 1.5 the best. It was hard to pick between 1 and 2 because I wasn't there when the picture was taken so I didnt know if something was making the day darker than its suppose to or anything.

Mike Teezie
Dec 19, 2005, 09:08 AM
Honestly, I like Lacero's 1.5 the best, but 2 is good too.

iGary
Dec 19, 2005, 09:09 AM
They finally get it (clients).

I think we're communicating again. ;)

Artful Dodger
Dec 19, 2005, 10:04 AM
iGary
They finally get it (clients).

I think we're communicating again.

That's always a good thing :)

FadeToBlack
Dec 19, 2005, 02:32 PM
That's always a good thing :)

Yeah, glad to hear it.

BTW, 1.5 looks best on my eMac's display.

iGary
Dec 19, 2005, 02:41 PM
I bascially took 1.5 and adjusted the midtones in curves and it came out real nicely.

It's funny how you forget those "Auto" functions because they seldom work correctly.

In this case, it worked! Thanks, Lacero.

Kobushi
Dec 19, 2005, 02:55 PM
That's funny. I rarely get the results I want from letting the computer do its thing. Oh well, happy clients = money + more clients.

By the way my first reaction to the original question (even without reading further) was #2. 3 hit me as almost cartoony.

iGary
Dec 19, 2005, 02:56 PM
That's funny. I rarely get the results I want from letting the computer do its thing. Oh well, happy clients = money + more clients.

By the way my first reaction to the original question (even without reading further) was #2. 3 hit me as almost cartoony.

That was the argument/discussion we were having. They "discovered" the highlight shadow tool and wanted to make EXTENSIVE use of it, which was driving me nuts. I used that exact word "cartoon."