Which Post Process Is Better? (Page 3): Thanks to all of you. The first one was done with simple, basic Apple Photos. The second was done with Luminar--my first attempt with that...

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Thanks to all of you. The first one was done with simple, basic Apple Photos. The second was done with Luminar--my first attempt with that program, and I think I overdid it a bit. Since it was my first photo edit with the program, I still have a lot to learn about it. For those of you who commented about the sky, it was just about that blue the day I took the photo--sort of surreal.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

jaymatt wrote:

Thanks to all of you. The first one was done with simple, basic Apple Photos. The second was done with Luminar--my first attempt with that program, and I think I overdid it a bit. Since it was my first photo edit with the program, I still have a lot to learn about it. For those of you who commented about the sky, it was just about that blue the day I took the photo--sort of surreal.

raw or JPG?

gener202002

I would say it really depends on what you want to do with the picture. Both are great.

It does seem that the top picture is more processed than the other; at least in the sense that the colors are a little deeper and richer. However, also a little more unrealistic. The sky is darker than a sky would normally be. But it looks good. Are we looking for a natural look? Or for a more aesthetic look? The bottom one has more of a natural look. Is that better? Yes, and no. It just depends on what impression you want to send to a viewer. I darken the sky significantly in several of my pictures. In others I do not. It just depends on what I feel in the moment and which style I want to impress. I don't think one is better than the other. They just invoke slightly different moods. And every photographer needs to decide which mood he or she intends to portray in a given photograph.

gener202002

gener202002 wrote:

I would say it really depends on what you want to ... (show quote)

I just noticed the post that said the sky really was deep blue that day. I thought the top one was more processed. I guess I was wrong. Still, I think the bottom one has a more natural look. And that one has a sky more the color that I would expect. However, I have noticed cameras can sometimes make a sky look bluer than it actually is. I think it depends on the overall effects of the scene on the camera.

Anyway, great pictures.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

jaymatt wrote:

One of these photos is done with my regular processing; one is done with Luminar. Which do you prefer? I'm happy to receive responses as to why. Thanks in advance.

#2 looks highly overprocessed to me, almost cartoon-like. I like #1 much better.

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

Wow! I get a tally of approximately 21 for image 1 and 22 for image 2, so I guess it's up to the maker to decide which he prefers.

jhcarvajal

The lower one is better if you only cosider the barn. But in general, the upper one with the darker blue sky, is more pleasant.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I'm leaning in the direction of the first photo. It appears to be a more natural looking scene.
--Bob

jaymatt wrote:

One of these photos is done with my regular processing; one is done with Luminar. Which do you prefer? I'm happy to receive responses as to why. Thanks in advance.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Remember that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Each of us has a different taste and a different opinion. We are all different.
The second shot is Luminar and I would have toned down the sky a little more to make it look more natural. The first shot has better exposure for the bright areas and the other parts of the photograph can be easily manipulated to look better. The second shot is already clipping the highlights and perhaps, depending on your taste, the middle tonalities could be improved to taste.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

Nice images John. Both have their positive qualities and I would like to see the sky in #1 in #2. Looking at the DL's, that would to me, make the image vibrant with the detail in #2.
Happy Turkey Day!

RickL Loc: Vail, Az

jaymatt wrote:

One of these photos is done with my regular processing; one is done with Luminar. Which do you prefer? I'm happy to receive responses as to why. Thanks in advance.

Number one is my choice. Good color balance. Number two is overcooked

john vance Loc: Granbury,Texas

# 2

jpgto Loc: North East Tennessee

Personally liking the first, the second one appears over processed and is detracting from your subject.......unnatural!

jpgto Loc: North East Tennessee

jaymatt wrote:

Thanks to all of you. The first one was done with simple, basic Apple Photos. The second was done with Luminar--my first attempt with that program, and I think I overdid it a bit. Since it was my first photo edit with the program, I still have a lot to learn about it. For those of you who commented about the sky, it was just about that blue the day I took the photo--sort of surreal.

Practice our friend, practice.

ebbote Loc: Hockley, Texas

I like #1 better John, #2 is too glaring.