Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Photo Gallery
Which is Preffered & Why
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Sep 1, 2022 09:12:14   #
kvanhook Loc: Oriental, NC
 
I agree with Salvagediver on this one. #3 for me. I just found #2 a little too contrasty. But I can see how some others would prefer it. "To each his own", said the old lady as she kissed the cow.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 10:00:54   #
Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida
 
SalvageDiver wrote:
Of the three options, I prefer the third one.

The first just looks underexposed, without any benefit.

The second, while a little brighter, is way to contrasty. The contrast loses the soft delicate nature of this flower.

The third has better exposure and softer contrast, but it still feels too hard and a little underexposed. IMO, the flower would look better if it was just a little brighter, bringing back a little more of the softer feel. Adding a little glow, like an Orton effect would further add to the delicate feel of the flower. Although, I would try to maintain some of the detail in the center of the flower. I like how the background is dark enough to isolate the flower but still have enough shadow detail so the viewer knows what's back there.

Just my preferences, YMMV.
Of the three options, I prefer the third one. br ... (show quote)


You said it all!

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 10:35:58   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
I like #2 best, but I would tone down the contrast a tad. I like #3, but would bring up the contrast a tad. Getting somewhere in between those two would probably by nice.

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2022 10:37:44   #
nmw1004 Loc: Dresher PA
 
I like #2. The higher contrast shows off more of the detail.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 11:13:58   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
I'm voting for number 2. Great tonality and details.
--Bob
TheShoe wrote:
These three are B&W conversions of the same color photo. Two of them were done using different presets of DxO PL 5.4, while the third was just me fiddling with sliders.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 13:58:20   #
TheShoe Loc: Lacey, WA
 
Thanks to all who have replied, even if one of the replies was not relevant to the question. For any who are interested, the conversions done were: 1 - DxO B&W Preset, 2 - DxO HD B7R Preset, and 3 - me fiddling with sliders. I will try some additional fiddling and post the result in this thread.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 14:11:44   #
joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA
 
amfoto1 wrote:
Of the three, I like the 3rd the best. It just seems the most appropriate for the subject matter.

BUT, I find #3 a bit too soft and flat.

I hope you don't mind... I tried to get somewhere in between #2 and #3. Sharper and a little more contrast than #3, but a little bit lighter touch than #2.

I'm not sure how it will look uploaded here, but here it is anyway...


A superlative floral portrait 🖤🤍🤍🤍🖤

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2022 14:16:46   #
TheShoe Loc: Lacey, WA
 
SalvageDiver wrote:
... Adding a little glow, like an Orton effect would further add to the delicate feel of the flower. ...


Thanks for commenting. I have a question regarding one of your points. I see plenty of examples of creating an Orton effect using PS layers; however, I use DxO PL5 which does not have similar layers. Do you know of a process for producing the effect without using layers?

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 15:25:50   #
Charlie157 Loc: San Diego, CA
 
I like all three. The first photo is interesting. When I first look at it I don't see a rose, right off. I see shapes and forms. The second and third photos I see the rose. But the "coloring" of the image gives the rose a different feeling to it, if that makes sense.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 16:06:07   #
rcarol
 
TheShoe wrote:
These three are B&W conversions of the same color photo. Two of them were done using different presets of DxO PL 5.4, while the third was just me fiddling with sliders.


I'm not fond of colorful flowers photographed in monochrome. So, I'm voting for none.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 18:07:51   #
TheShoe Loc: Lacey, WA
 
I tend to agree with all who have preferred more detail in the image. I also agree with those have said that the second image perhaps went too far. This is a compromise between numbers 2 and 3. Have I gone too far or not far enough?


(Download)

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2022 18:31:48   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
I think it's pretty nice.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 18:37:13   #
suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ
 
All nice- first one is the most interesting, I like the exposure and contrast of the 2nd one and the third one has the least amount of interest- kind of bla.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 18:49:20   #
MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama
 
I vote for ALL THREE... It just shows that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder... This is NOT an exact science governed by absolute rules.

Reply
Sep 1, 2022 19:19:21   #
SalvageDiver Loc: Huntington Beach CA
 
TheShoe wrote:
Thanks for commenting. I have a question regarding one of your points. I see plenty of examples of creating an Orton effect using PS layers; however, I use DxO PL5 which does not have similar layers. Do you know of a process for producing the effect without using layers?


Sorry, I know nothing about DXO's photolab. However, it it's anything like Lightroom, you can try creating that ethereal glow by reducing clarity. You can further tune that effect by adjusting texture and dehaze. I don't know if or how that translates to dxo pl5.

I hope that helps

Mike

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Gallery
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.