photosbytw Loc: Blue Ridge Mountains

When you post your images.....check the (store original) box as it will allow the viewer to get a better view.
I also feel the images are still too saturated but are an improvement from earlier posts.The softness of the Smoky Mountain image would be an exception. I, for one, enjoy it..............and since I'm here.....

Snarky, adjective.
\ ˈsnär-kē \
Definition of snarky
1: CROTCHETY, SNAPPISH
2: sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner
snarky lyrics

tw

Richard1947 Loc: Knoxville, TN

No comment.

Richard1947 Loc: Knoxville, TN

Thanks for that clarification, I’ve never used the word in my vocabulary, I find it a bit “snarky”. And since I’m replying........

Style: a particular manner or technique by which something is done, created, or performed

Let’s just be cordial with one another and agree to disagree. But again, thank you for looking and for your comments. You’ve answered me as I have asked in my post.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

I love em all. Likely missed earlier posts. BTW I'm red/green color "impaired" so I have also been told by some that I over saturate. I take photos for my own enjoyment but willing to share.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

To whom??? OK, listen to Brian. Get a ColorMunki or SpyderX monitor calibrator. If the images look fine to you on your computer but "several" Hogs are complaining about the color intensity, then "Houston, we have a problem."
Let's get everybody on the same page before you ask folks to critique your work. No sense in comparing apples-to-oranges.
And I may have mentioned this before but it helps a lot in our evaluation if you would check "(store original)" when you attach an image. The better we can see it, the better we can advise you.

SonyBug

i liked yours oversaturated. They appeared much more like "art" that way.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

Much better, although I think the last one could be pulled back a bit. Do you calibrate your monitor?

Richard1947 Loc: Knoxville, TN

I’ll say it once more. I have the SpyderX and used it to calibrate my monitor. I wasn’t aware of the “store original” prior to this post but I am now. Thanks for the feedback and for looking.

fergmark Loc: norwalk connecticut

I don't think its entirely a saturation issue. These photos are all rendered in very different ways. The Washington Monument I don't give a second thought as to saturation. It may have a saturation boost but the impact is well within reason. The Oklahoma sunset looks unnatural to my eye mostly because of the purple at the top. I have never seen that color in a sky. Otherwise it looks perfectly natural. The shadows at Presidio appears immediately as an altered photo. The shadows in the green has been lightened way past any reality, however so far this is by far my favorite. Its terrific, and I am not off put at all by your treatment. Smokey Mountains looks absolutely natural. The sunset at Tijuana looks totally strange to my eye. The road is the same value whether in the sun or the shade, and the buildings are much the same. It appears that warmer colors are for the sunny areas and cooler colors for shade and tonal range be damned.

Moondoggie Loc: Southern California

Looks good to me too! Thanks for sharing

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

The first two are reasonable. The last three are still a bit oversaturated (not a misnomer). The last one, though, is potentially ok. I'm just not familiar with that part of the world and the colors with which they paint their houses.
--Bob

photosbytw Loc: Blue Ridge Mountains

No comment............

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

I love the Washington Monument image.

Papa Joe Loc: Midwest U.S.

Richard, you're headed in the right direction. Much improved in my opinion, (except the Mexico shot... still a bit over, but again.... that's just MY opinion.)
It's a fact, that monitor adjustment (or mis-adjustment) can make a drastic difference in the final product, such as 'seeing the photo perfect on the screen', but then printing it and ending up with a discouragingly different photo.
Bottom line: You've posted some good photos, content-wise, composition, etc. Keep at it. Most 'hoggers' are here to help one another, but like the barrel of apples... well, you know:o)

Papa Joe

PGHphoto Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Since I responded to your last post, just to close input, I will offer my comments here. I personally feel they are over saturated. When you lose detail/sharpness in the photo due to over-saturation, in my eye its too much. Doesn't mean you have to process so I like it - but you asked for opinion. To illustrate what I am saying, if you take the hazy trees and grass photo (#3) and bring the saturation down, the grass will become more distinct and detailed.

Curious, does the scene look like your images when just looking around without a camera or does it appear much less vibrant ? I ask because a friend of mine just had cataract surgery and he says the difference in vibrance and saturation is unbelievable after the surgery. Your comment about looking black and white if you pull more saturation back is what prompted this comment. Wasn't sure if you were just kidding or serious. You probably do not have any physical issues.

Just a thought - very much hope this is not an issue and I am way off base. Since you have not said if the scene was lacking in saturation to your naked eye, just wanted to suggest that its something to check out. Hopefully what you are creating is just a preference and as a preference, all is good.