Which one (Page 2): I am sorry to say that, non of them, Too much PP, and not realty with the position of the Sun, in that low angle of the Sun, It showed no shadow from the animals...

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

Longshadow wrote:

The second.

I am sorry to say that, non of them, Too much PP, and not realty with the position of the Sun, in that low angle of the Sun, It showed no shadow from the animals, un-natural at all!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

wingclui44 wrote:

I am sorry to say that, non of them, Too much PP, and not realty with the position of the Sun, in that low angle of the Sun, It showed no shadow from the animals, un-natural at all!

If the two, as they exist, still the second.

DAN Phillips Loc: Graysville, GA

Neither, overcooked and unnatural. Better luck next time.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

I like the scene, but I think they are both heavily processed. If I had to choose, I’d go with the lighter one.

Tom DePuy Loc: Waxhaw, N.C.

Neither...

DragonsLady Loc: Los Alamos, NM

I like the first one best, the horses are larger. I don't care for the sun flare, but don't know how to avoid it, other than not shooting into the sun.

StevenG Loc: Long Island, NY

donroe wrote:

Which one

1

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

No. 2.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

zzzynick wrote:

Neither, they are both seriously over saturated.
And it looks like you over dosed on the noise reduction.
Its kind of a rookie mistake, I did the very same things at first.
Unless you are going for some kind of special effects,
The more natural you can make your shot look, the better it will be.

I agree.
Plus, LIGHT is always critical, and the sun positions do not agree with the light on the horses.
You have a beautiful shot of those horses (#1 has better shadow detail)--I suggest not overdoing it.

crafterwantabe Loc: Mn

#2

bertloomis Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

It is quite difficult for me to choose, but probably #1.

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

donroe wrote:

Which one

Which one depends on the purpose of the photo. The bright highlights on the top of the horses and their shadows tells us the sun was directly overhead, so why add the sun? It is the brightest object in the image and detracts the viewer from concentrating on the horses - presumably the real subject. Decide what you want the viewer to see and emphasize that to add interest.

polonois Loc: Lancaster County,PA.

wham121736 wrote:

Which one depends on the purpose of the photo. The bright highlights on the top of the horses and their shadows tells us the sun was directly overhead, so why add the sun? It is the brightest object in the image and detracts the viewer from concentrating on the horses - presumably the real subject. Decide what you want the viewer to see and emphasize that to add interest.

sergio

sorry I dislike oversaturation

TheShoe Loc: Lacey, WA

zzzynick wrote:

Neither, they are both seriously over saturated.
And it looks like you over dosed on the noise reduction.
Its kind of a rookie mistake, I did the very same things at first.
Unless you are going for some kind of special effects,
The more natural you can make your shot look, the better it will be.

Ditto