wds0410 Loc: Nunya

I tend to agree with this assessment. I lived in England for six months and I swear it seemed like it rained every day even if briefly. Couple that with the British propensity for understatement coupled with America's reputation for over the top type displays, enthusiasm, and culture and you have a ready explanation for the different approaches to post processing. While the UK and America have a lot in common, there are a some big differences as well as noted here.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Funny, my first experience in England, stayed in South Hampton, my wife said it would be dreary, cloudy etc. We got there and it was sunny, hot and beautiful for the near month we were there. People stripping naked in the parks to sun, playing in water, swimming.
Yes, subsequent visits have confirmed that the dreary also does exist. But it was funny my first experience was so a-typical.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I, too, see a problem with over-saturated, over-worked images, but it hadn't occurred to me that it was a cultural problem. I can understand why these differences occur - there are differences in our approaches to and reactions to the world because of our corporate personalities. I'm not in favor of the over-saturation prevalent in the US, but I do find that I've been influenced by it. When it first began with the laser prints available in stores, it looked garrish. I now see some of that creeping into my own work. There have been several articles published by professional photographers about their efforts to thwart the over-saturation "problem," but I don't know how successful they've been in their attempts.

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

As a US photographer for 70 years I too have noticed the difference in photos from the US/UK. There are some overcooked images here on the forum but many images where hdr etc. is used to evoke what the photographer saw. Perhaps it’s as much a difference in how we see things as it is in how we PP images.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I know what you mean, and I've seen many articles about the English switching to American words and spellings - not a good idea.

As for over-processing, I think many people do it because they can. I like to experiment and produce weird results, but when I want to make a nice image, I aim for something approaching reality. Commercial photographers have to produce what someone will buy, whether it looks natural or not.

adrianpd

Not Winston Churchill but Oscar Wilde. In The Canterville Ghost (1887), Wilde wrote: ‘We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language’. All the other other attributions, (Churchill,Bernard Shaw) do not reveal anything in their writings.

P-J Loc: UK

Do you mean 'Southampton'. the city/port on the the south coast of England?

If so, maybe you've made my point?

Long live the difference in out languages & cultures.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Are you talking about real pictures or computer images?

P-J Loc: UK

Thank you I stand corrected!

Typical it takes an Irishman to point it out?

P-J Loc: UK

'Stripping naked' in the parks? That doesn't sound like British reserve? It is also illegal in the UK ,so maybe stripping down to swimwear maybe?

& I guess you mean 'Southampton'?

dr.juice

Consider the issue of flowing water or water that is "rough" because the wind is blowing. Making that look smooth is a common issue in US websites and publications. A significant part of my photographic life has been spent on these kinds of surfaces and I've never seen them as a uniform color or photographed them as a uniform color though a number of books purporting to teach photography in the US spend well over half their time discussing water on how to make the water a smooth surface with a uniform color. B-O-R-I-N-G! drjuice

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I too am a working professional photographer- now going on 60 years. In my professional endeavors, I have participated in many international PRINT competitions bot as a competitor and a judge. Especially in the pre-digital days, I did not observe any differences in PRINT quality that I could assign to any particular country or culture. I found, more so, that each photographer had his or her own individual style and quality standards. Within each nationality and culture, there were many styles and approaches. In weddig photograhy and portraiture there are certin cultural preferences as to rendition of complexion, colorfulness of wedding garb and attire and are not necessarily to do with general print or image quality. Having a very diverse client base, I can write a book about that.

So...the operative word here is "PRINT". Competition standards included the lighting level and color temperature by which prints would be judged. Of course, there were prints with various levels of contrast, tonality, saturation, and content and were judge accordingly.
The makers would prepare their prints accordingly as well. Retouching was judged on its invisibility- if it was poorly or noticeably overdone to the point of distraction, points were deducted. Oftentimes, professional portrait and wedding photographer employed expert retouchers- not even the best shooters all have the "hand and eye" and talent for fine retouching. Back in the film era, photographers had to carefully choose films and papers as to "palette", contrast, tonality, and color rendition. In the early days, it seems to me that films produced in Japan had a more pastel and delicate palette. America's emulsions were generally warmer and had more "oomph"! In later times, it seems that everybody jumped on the over-saturated and higher contrast wagon and it was hard to find a film that rendered realistic and subtle colors.

Enter the digital age. Competitions aside, folks here on this forum are viewing images on all manner of screens and devices. The Universe only knows if our screens, phones, tablets, and computers are calibrated anywhere near the original maker's devices. Everybody and his or her mother-in-law is a "digital technician"- not necessarily a fine print-maker! They are running their "sliders" like a teenager in his first sports car "peddle to the metal"! They are looking at a trans-illuminated image- not a reflection print. Everybody and his or her uncle is a "retoucher" some utilizing pre-set programs and sometimes the results look like bad embalming! Many of the images look like underexposed Kodachrome printed on Cibachrome paper in overactive chemistry. I've seen stuff like this from everywhere in the world, including the UK, Australia, and Asia. It's not any particular national or cultural trend- it's just bad photography!

In the U.S., especially in the wedding photography business, there have been trends to overuse special effects- almost to a fault. This too, factors into gaudy imagery. This is something that many more advanced workers have stayed away from in that it is not a style that survives the years and oftentimes "wedding albums" begin to resemble "comic books"

In a geographic area as vast as North America, there are many cultures, religions, trends, and diverse tastes on the part of consumers and that may dictate the style that professional photographers adopt.

I have nothing against special effects, computer art, and folks having fun with all the various apps and plugins. It's fun- I do it myself on my cell phone but I am not going to represent that stuff as fine photography.

There any many photographers, both amateur and professionals, that post perfectly balanced images, here on the forum, all the time. They know their technology and have everything properly calibrated.

P-J Loc: UK

Whatever floats yours or their boats? Water I guess?

Long shutter speeds are the answer: - 1/15th of a second or longer? What's left to discuss?

P-J Loc: UK

I'm with you all the way on that one. Though the issue with me was the use of fill-in flash on weddings & outdoor portraiture during my film time.

We used it more subtlety here in the UK as opposed to what I saw of US images in the same genre at the time. Nothing wrong with either of them, just personal tastes & that of our clients/subjects/

& yes we always printed for correct exposed & colour of skin tones. Letting all the other colours take care of themselves in the print process? Almost exclusively using Fuji Velvia 120 at the end. Maybe there was a different colour rendition of this film for European & US markets, perhaps more saturated colours on the US version? I don't know only guessing.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Is criticizing while saying it’s not a criticism more of a UK or USA thing?