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

Started Aug 20, 2013 | Polls
Pritzl Senior Member • Posts: 1,459
You can put lipstick on a pig...

... but I still wouldn't kiss it.

 Pritzl's gear list:Pritzl's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Canon EOS 70D Fujifilm X-T2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Tokina AT-X Pro 12-24mm f/4 DX II +9 more
Mike Ronesia
Mike Ronesia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,043
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
2

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Carsten captured & presented what he saw, although somewhat dreary, it's what he saw. You converted it to a garish, over saturated and otherwise overcooked image that does not depict reality. Your style may work for you, and for many others, but it lacks reality IMO.

If you had read his caption that I even INCLUDED in my post, you would know that his image does NOT represent "what he saw" and that he applied HDR to it. My point was that his use of HDR was horribly ineffective and completely unnoticeable.

How do you know his HDR was horribly ineffective? Did you see what it looked like without HDR? A good HDR shot should not be "noticeable". My opinion of course.

-- hide signature --

Mark James
A.K.A. Mike Ronesia

 Mike Ronesia's gear list:Mike Ronesia's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sigma sd Quattro +13 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 42,852
I dare you...

Pritzl wrote:

You can put lipstick on a pig but I still wouldn't kiss it.

...to say that in the Off Topic Forum. 

Doug J Forum Pro • Posts: 10,110
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Carsten captured & presented what he saw, although somewhat dreary, it's what he saw. You converted it to a garish, over saturated and otherwise overcooked image that does not depict reality. Your style may work for you, and for many others, but it lacks reality IMO.

If you had read his caption that I even INCLUDED in my post, you would know that his image does NOT represent "what he saw" and that he applied HDR to it. My point was that his use of HDR was horribly ineffective and completely unnoticeable.

I read the caption. You don't know it was ineffective from his perspective.

OP Mikhail Tal Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

Mike Ronesia wrote:

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Carsten captured & presented what he saw, although somewhat dreary, it's what he saw. You converted it to a garish, over saturated and otherwise overcooked image that does not depict reality. Your style may work for you, and for many others, but it lacks reality IMO.

If you had read his caption that I even INCLUDED in my post, you would know that his image does NOT represent "what he saw" and that he applied HDR to it. My point was that his use of HDR was horribly ineffective and completely unnoticeable.

How do you know his HDR was horribly ineffective?

Because the visual result completely contradicts the tone of his caption.

Did you see what it looked like without HDR? A good HDR shot should not be "noticeable". My opinion of course.

-- hide signature --

Mark James
A.K.A. Mike Ronesia

OP Mikhail Tal Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

Doug J wrote:

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Carsten captured & presented what he saw, although somewhat dreary, it's what he saw. You converted it to a garish, over saturated and otherwise overcooked image that does not depict reality. Your style may work for you, and for many others, but it lacks reality IMO.

If you had read his caption that I even INCLUDED in my post, you would know that his image does NOT represent "what he saw" and that he applied HDR to it. My point was that his use of HDR was horribly ineffective and completely unnoticeable.

I read the caption. You don't know it was ineffective from his perspective.

I know that if it wasn't ineffective from his perspective, then he fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of HDR.

oklaphotog Senior Member • Posts: 1,093
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
2

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Okay, you think that is overprocessed, I revised it to show that to something in between the two, so you can still see that it was taken in bad weather but more dynamic and punchy than his original. Again bear in mind that he claimed to do a bunch of fancy processing and all I had to do was move a few sliders around.

This is better than your first attempt... But it can be made punchy with out looking garish and ghoulish. Personally if I were to go bright with it, I would prefer the velvia look than the strange midtones in yours that make it look illustrated, rather than a photograph.

OP Mikhail Tal Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

oklaphotog wrote:

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Okay, you think that is overprocessed, I revised it to show that to something in between the two, so you can still see that it was taken in bad weather but more dynamic and punchy than his original. Again bear in mind that he claimed to do a bunch of fancy processing and all I had to do was move a few sliders around.

This is better than your first attempt... But it can be made punchy with out looking garish and ghoulish. Personally if I were to go bright with it, I would prefer the velvia look than the strange midtones in yours that make it look illustrated, rather than a photograph.

YES! THAT'S IT! A PERFECT PHOTOGRAPH! LET US EXULT IN ITS UNDYING GRACE AND BEAUTY! I MUST DISCOVER YOUR SECRET! THIS IS THE BEST ONE YET!

fcallington Regular Member • Posts: 101
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
1

Nice troll. Well played.

NetMage Senior Member • Posts: 2,910
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
1

If anyone misunderstands the purpose of HDR, it is you. And talking about the "purpose" of HDR indicates a fundamental lack of understanding in general.

-- hide signature --

-- Please remove the Quote option!
-- How about switching to real forum software?

 NetMage's gear list:NetMage's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Sigma DP1x Fujifilm X10 Fujifilm X-S1 +23 more
Tony Sx Senior Member • Posts: 2,163
To answer your original question.....
2

Neither image appeals but yours is definitely rubbish. Stick to chess.

-- hide signature --

Tony

gollywop
gollywop Veteran Member • Posts: 8,284
Krieger's is blah. Yours sucks. (nt)
7
-- hide signature --

gollywop

Brev00
Brev00 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,475
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
1

Your point is well taken.  While your version may not stand by itself as a great shot, it does illustrate the weaknesses of the original which, I believe, is your main point.  On the other hand, the negative tone of your post undercuts your position.  I mean, who really cares if some fraud gets ahead?  I am not going to keep track of all the losers who win, that is for sure.

 Brev00's gear list:Brev00's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D610 Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F4-5.6 Di VC USD Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D +5 more
Doug J Forum Pro • Posts: 10,110
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Mikhail Tal wrote:

Doug J wrote:

Carsten captured & presented what he saw, although somewhat dreary, it's what he saw. You converted it to a garish, over saturated and otherwise overcooked image that does not depict reality. Your style may work for you, and for many others, but it lacks reality IMO.

If you had read his caption that I even INCLUDED in my post, you would know that his image does NOT represent "what he saw" and that he applied HDR to it. My point was that his use of HDR was horribly ineffective and completely unnoticeable.

I read the caption. You don't know it was ineffective from his perspective.

I know that if it wasn't ineffective from his perspective, then he fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of HDR.

I stand by my original post. He has some great shots that work for me, this is not one of them. Its irrelevant if you think he does or doesn't understand HDR. Your reprocessed version I particularly do not find appealing at all, but then it doesn't have to work for me if you're pleased with it. I look mostly at the outcome.

Best regards,
Doug

Dedcakes
Dedcakes Regular Member • Posts: 137
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

What you've quoted are truths.

"Digital technology has made capturing good images in bad weather much easier."

"To the naked eye the sky in this scene was a bland grey. Using the HDR technique and applying a digital tonal contrast filter brought out detail and colour."

Also, your image is over-processed and inferior. Good job turning a grey, poor weather, day into one that's bright and sunny. DPR should really consider doing a piece on your fabulous work.

 Dedcakes's gear list:Dedcakes's gear list
Voigtlander 20mm F3.5 Color Skopar SL II Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8 Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Fujifilm FinePix X100 +10 more
Joseph T Lewis III Veteran Member • Posts: 3,485
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
1

Ulric wrote:

DenWil wrote:

The first is flat, lifeless and murky. The second is ...well, I didn't know there was an Adobe LSD plug in.

Good summary

Don't be too harsh on the OP; perhaps he was only trying to get the photo to match the black velvet Elvis paintings he has hanging in his living room...

-- hide signature --

Tom

 Joseph T Lewis III's gear list:Joseph T Lewis III's gear list
Canon PowerShot G7 X Olympus E-M1 Olympus PEN-F Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +6 more
phaedin
phaedin Senior Member • Posts: 1,634
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?
1

Since you like bombastic images. I will give you a bombastic critique.
IT'S HORRIBLE. The post processing is so bad it makes my eyes bleed. You have totally lost the original intent of the image and ..... Sorry what was I talking about? I've forgotten

 phaedin's gear list:phaedin's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon D7500 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR +1 more
Elvin S Pipperman New Member • Posts: 2
Re: Who's image is better, Carsten Krieger's or mine?

I think the main problem with this picture is that the subject (the ruin) inherently has less visual impact than its surroundings, primarily due to its relative lack of color. I decided to "take the challenge" to see if I could start from that perspective and alter the photo to give the subject more relative presence. Working only in Apple Aperture I completely desaturated it so I could concentrate on tone, did a bunch of adjustments, then put a little saturation back in, but much less than the original. What do you think of this approach?

Attempt to increase subject interest.

tjdean01 Senior Member • Posts: 2,255
Camera beats naked eye?

I doubt his image looks better than it would to the naked eye.  Not in that situation anyway.

The HDR on both of them looks bad.  Just give the regular photo with the sky over exposed.  That's what I'd like to see.

TheEye
TheEye Veteran Member • Posts: 4,738
I'm not sure about whose grammar is better...

...or worse.  

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads