A simple question but maybe not (Page 2): Keep in mind the monitor as well. On my uncalibrated iMac monitor, everything looks over saturated and far too contrasty. Not only that, but...

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

icemncmth wrote:

I grew up using Nikon..FM's FE's etc and Currently I have a D90. I've seen a lot of photo's with a lot of oversaturation. I'm from an artits background and I like the ability to do and feel how you want. My question is when I look at photos that are over processed or the saturation is huge...these photos look flat to me. They loose their artistic touch and their depth. I know art is subjective but maybe I'm getting old.

Keep in mind the monitor as well. On my uncalibrated iMac monitor, everything looks over saturated and far too contrasty. Not only that, but there can also be difference between calibrated monitors of different makes as well!

That said, on my calibrated monitor things usually look much better (although there are always super saturated overdone images - I've done a few myself in the past but I'm trying to get better about it :) )

Just a thought.

mrjcall Loc: Woodfin, NC

icemncmth wrote:

So oversaturation can minimise the depth of field.

Now there's a statement I've never heard before.... How is that accomplished? Apparent, not actual I'm sure is the operative word here, but still don't get it?

EddieC Loc: CT

It's all about personal tastes. I have one friend who will not post process her photos. The way she decides to shoot a pic it is the way it will be. On the other end of the spectrum I have a friend who will labor at PhotoShop for a few hours playing with layers until he gets it right. As for myself, a few tweaks in LR and I am happy with the image. No sweating over a computer for a long time.

Quixdraw Loc: x

:thumbup:

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

icemncmth wrote:

I know art is subjective...

Exactly. When I process my pictures, I'm the only one I have to please. People working at the Kennedy Space Center don't have that option.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

icemncmth wrote:

I grew up using Nikon..FM's FE's etc and Currently I have a D90. I've seen a lot of photo's with a lot of oversaturation. I'm from an artits background and I like the ability to do and feel how you want. My question is when I look at photos that are over processed or the saturation is huge...these photos look flat to me. They loose their artistic touch and their depth. I know art is subjective but maybe I'm getting old.

There is a lot to be said about getting out of ones comfort zone to keep the spirits alive. We have purists and artists and we coexist nicely. I find myself appreciating both, more and more.

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

over saturated, rather sharp giving dramatic colors across the entire range leave me cold - I glance and go.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I particularly like pastel colors. The Olympus EP-5 is the camera I am using now more often but Olympus tune-up the colors in their firmware on the saturated side. My EP-5 has contrast and saturation set to low and then if need it I reverse those changes in the computer but never to the levels I would expect from the firmware.
Some people like their pictures saturated while others swear by the contrast in their photographs. It is all subjective.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

BboH wrote:

over saturated, rather sharp giving dramatic colors across the entire range leave me cold - I glance and go.

Don't we all glance a go when we see a picture we don't like regardless?

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

quixdraw wrote:

Sharpshooter -- point of view, personal taste -- 90% MOMA isn't worth my time -- I'll take the Metropolitan any time. If any photographer likes his work who am I to criticize it unless they request a critique-- then I'll try to ask first what they don't like, then suggest possible options for change. Fortunately we don't have a Ministry for Art -- yet. Supposed to be fun.

Good quote. :thumbup: :thumbup:

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

quixdraw wrote:

Throwing a fox in with the chickens, some philosophers believe that nothing we see is real!:-)

A whole bunch of stuff is happening at the same time. Color perception is purely subjective. Even you left eye sees color differently than your right. "Good art" definitions differ with time and what's popular at the time. Many "classic artists" were broke during their life because their work didn;t sell. Accoring to Einstein, we see nothing in real time, we see everything is the past as it takes time for the light to reach our eyes. One could argue that there is no such thing as a good piece of art because what's good to 1 person just may be trash to another, and who is to say who is right. Here is a saturated scene. The water is washed out (pun intended) so as to highlight the fall colors

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

boberic wrote:

A whole bunch of stuff is happening at the same ti... (show quote)

OOPS forgot to post the photo- here it is

Saturated photo

MtnMan Loc: ID

boberic wrote:

OOPS forgot to post the photo- here it is

Yes, the photo has several issues including blown highlights and wrong white balance (look at grass in foreground). Fixing white balance might help apparent over saturation.

Don Fischer Loc: Antelope, Ore

Just curious. seem's most photographer's feel they are artist's. They don't find what was there good enough so they get heavy into post processing. When they get done, they don't show anyone what was there but rather their idea of what they saw. Do many people take photograph's any more?

MtnMan Loc: ID

Don Fischer wrote:

Just curious. seem's most photographer's feel they are artist's. They don't find what was there good enough so they get heavy into post processing. When they get done, they don't show anyone what was there but rather their idea of what they saw. Do many people take photograph's any more?

Maybe your question should be worded "snapshots". And the answer is "far more than ever". Just look around at those tablets and phones clicking away. They don't post process.

But real photographers have always engaged in extensive post processing. Andel Adams spent far more tine in the dark room than in the field. No one would buy an image made directly from one of his negatives.

Yes, real photography is an art.

It is a mistake to think any camera can image "what is there".