Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

Started Aug 20, 2013 | Polls thread
OP Mikhail Tal Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

santamonica812 wrote:

First version: Low saturation, and to my eye, a realistic representation of what the photographer was looking at. Not a terribly interesting image, but unobjectionable.

Your first attempt: Simply dreadful. An above poster used the word 'cartoonish,' and that probably fits better than anything I could come up with. The horrific overcooking was a poor processing decision . . . it's one of the worst-looking images I've seen in recent memory. (I'd never give this sort of feedback sua sponte, but you did specifically ask for our reactions.) The later, toned-down versions were much much better.

Honestly, when I first looked at your first attempt, I thought you were joking, and that you were poking fun at people who don't know how to use any restraint in their post-processing. I feel a bit bad, and a bit ashamed, now that I know you were making a good-faith effort to make the original photo better. Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I guess it's a good thing that what appeals to one person will repel another.

Don't let my feedback (or any of the other negative feedback) discourage you. We were all beginners at one point. And once you have a few months of photographer, and of post-processing, under your belt, you'll never make this sort of mistake again. We were all there once . . . and luckily for those of us with a few years under out belt, our train-wrecks of early experiments were done in private, and were well before the widespread nature of the internet. I'd hate for anyone to see my work that I did during my first photography class.

So, keep it up! Your work will certainly get a lot better over time, as it did for all of us.

I am glad that you have supplied a candid reaction. I actually think that the credibility of my first edit is validated by the fact that it evoked a much more powerful response from you than the original. The original was unobjectionable but uninteresting. The second was objectionable, ergo interesting. Controversial, if you will. It polarizes opinion as much as it polarizes the color gamut. One of the worst-looking images you've seen in recent memory? That's an amazing accomplishment that few could ever hope to achieve! ANYONE can make an unobjectionable, uninteresting, image, but few can make one that is unforgettable.

I like bright, bombastic, brilliant things that amplify reality rather than mask or dilute it. A glance at my posting history will reveal that my modus operandi in discussions about phtoography is to shatter the proverbial echo chamber of the DSLR-centric paradigm that relentlessly persists and challenge the dogma of its staunchest defenders. I enjoy still scenes that scream toward you at a hundred miles an hour with reckless abandon and complete disregard for human life. I saw no such thing in the original image and so I injected it with a mother lode of optical power.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow