winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Not wishing to hijack minnie’s thread I respond here to questions asked of me therein.

Please refer to :- http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-423896-1.html

The following is said with all due respect to all involved parties

Why did I say Frank’s edit is a disaster?

Min made a nice pic of a serene scene.

She achieved it by doing a good job capturing the scene initially which is obvious, but to her further credit managed to retain that serenity with restraint in her post processing.

Frank fiddled with some sliders just for the sake of it, it seems, and gave us a hi-contrast version which took the feel of the pic some way away from minnie’s obvious intent.

But that in itself does not make his version a disaster and I would not say for that reason alone that it was, even if it was.

At a guess, I would estimate that the scene was about six stops worth and with minnie’s edit spanned about seven.

Frank’s edit reduced that to about five stops.

Minnie’s pic shows evidence of some degree of combing and the histogram reflects this but in Frank’s case the pic has degraded to an unacceptable degree of posterization.

There are eight pixels evident in the bird’s beak in minnie’s pic where the red channel is blown but in Frank’s edit there has appeared that big blown area in front of the bird.

Now if he did not see it then perhaps more attention should be paid to the results of his manipulation of sliders but to describe purposefully painting a serene scene with white paint and a big brush as being “illustrative” kinda escapes me.

So Frank, naughty Frank, we don’t blow our highlights here in the FYC.

Not in camera and not in post.

The bottom line is that your edit in effect reduced min’s lovely twelve stop Oly to a five stop disposable.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

If I didn't see it why would I have mentioned it Rob. I am glad you did not high jack and started a new thread. Thank you for pointing all this out Rob. The bottom line is minniev got the idea "I was trying to illustrate" even if it wasn't portrayed properly according to Rob's rule.


Edit: I meant this with all due respect also Rob.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

What's "Rob's rule" Frank?

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

So Frank, naughty Frank, we don’t blow our highlights here in the FYC.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

There are no rules in the FYC then; so if it makes you happy to blow minnie's highlights then who am I to say?

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Thank you Rob....I always welcome you to say what ever you will and respect your right to do so.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

Frank I think I was the first to mention your edit had done nothing for mins picture. No big deal we all get over zealous with the sliders from time to time.
I just thought you had not "read" mins picture very well which is unlike you. The young lady presented a picture of totally quiet serenity which if you go back to it and look is a masterpiece in processing a scene in exactly the way it should be done.
Yes she did ask for edits etc as is her way. It mite start a conversation or debate. Billy snores lol. I'm quite convinced min knew she had got this shot just right and produced some stunning work out of a scene many would have walked by. Your edit just blinged it up and destroyed the mood.
Not an issue I would have thought, we all are capable of going in the wrong direction when engrossed in trying to do something with an image and especially when trying to push it to a place where it possibly does not belong.
I will continue to support your very sharp and perceptive eye but in this case I am of the opinion you failed to see what the image was about before heading for the Photoshop bling button. Not wanting to pour petrol on a bonfire Frank but you left behind a pile of blown highlights which if they had been present in the original you would I'm sure have mentioned.
However the ensuing debate may prove to be a good learning experience for all so a Phoenix may rise from the ashes.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

When i visit FYC i don't expect total harmony but i do expect concise, honest
feedback on posts or comments.
How about leaving your personalities at the door and for heavens sake shove
all this false diplomacy, bowing an apologizing where it don't shine.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

No personalities come into it oldT, I was asked for an explanation by both minnie and Frank and out of respect for and not wishing to hijack minnie's thread, I started this one.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

I think we all agree that the OP posted a fine little snapshot.
I think we also agree that blowing out both ends of the histogram and adding the halo to the bird
did very little to improve it.
My complaint is over all the non image related verbiage.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Noted.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

I believe this is where the confusion lies for both you and Rob Mr. Spad......was not trying to do something for mins picture, was doing something for minniev...was giving her what she asked for and by her own admission I succeeded. What I do know for sure is that minniev did not ask for opinions of edits from others even though both positive and negative were given.
Seems a statement of somewhat closed mindedness from one that confesses to have seen the world through mind altered states, for me they are just directions my friend with no right or wrong....course I've been know to be a simpleton and not very judgemental.
I now believe one has.

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

With all due respect to Rob and Frank, this whole conversation feels like a hijack to me, more troublesome than if the conversation had continued on the thread it belonged to rather than just referencing it. I have never complained about any pertinent photography- or art-related conversation as a side bar in my threads. I've been known to even invite that kind of highjacking. But here is a thread about one of my photographs, for the purpose of critiquing a critique. Something just feels wrong about that.

But- some underlying premises/questions are valid to discuss on their own merits: the purpose or value of allowing edits to images we post, what we might learn or not from those edits, and whether critique of the edits is a valid response to them. I'll respond to those even though I feel uncomfortable with the way the discussion came about and the path it has followed, which undercuts the purpose for which I allow edits.

I allow edits because I find it easier to SEE what the person is suggesting than to follow the verbiage describing it; both together (image + words) is even better. I have never taken one of those edits as a final version, but I have often incorporated ideas from them in the version in question or other versions. I don't see the edits of normally posted images as being anything like a final since with mine they are working with a jpeg usually 1000 pixels longest side, guaranteed to produce many problems when re-edited.

With this image, there were two edits posted and I learned from both. Frank's gave me the idea to get a little more definition to the bird's shadow, which is murky in mine, and rlaugh's gave me a notion about warming the light which I will apply to another image from this shoot. I don't think either of them meant their offered edit to be more than an abbreviated illustration of concept, given the limitations of the file and what we do here. That's what I offer when I post edits. If I work more in depth on an image with another member, we do it via dropbox where we can share work on a copy of the base file.

I am not sure that extensive critique of one of these quick edits is a rabbit that it's reasonable to chase, and it can derail the conversation about the posted image, a problem that is not resolved by starting a separate thread ostensibly to critique a critique.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

I simply concur minniev.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

If we don't critique a critique (as in critique an edit), then how are we to know the relative value of the suggestion being made?
Whether they be a slap on the wrist or a kick up side my pointy little head,
i come to FYC for judgements, suggestions, alternative game plans and harsh criticism.
Being a bit of a panty waist my feelings are easily hurt. Being an old fart i tend to be a bit harsh in my response.
Being kinda good at what i do, i tend to try and defend what i;ve done, i'm human.
But the bottom line is "its all about the image, not the person posting".
I just don't see critiquing an edit as counterproductive or hijacking.