The unedited versions look a bit flat and colorless. The modified versions may be too vibrant, but are much preferable. I couldn't tell you which was more accurate I wasn't there.
Bob W wrote: > Hi, > > I don't usually muck about much with photos, just presenting them more > or less as they come straight from the camera. However, here are a > couple of photos from a reedbed close to my house: > > http://www.web-options.com/Reedbed/ > > I have altered the curves on both of these because the originals are > very muddy: > http://www.web-options.com/_4084933.jpg > http://www.web-options.com/_4084944.jpg > > I'd be interested to hear peoples' opinions about these alterations. > Do they look natural? I've done them by eye, but I don't trust my eyes > in this sort of thing, being colourblind. Do they look overdone? > > The more I look at them, the more I think the edited ones are overdone > and overdramatic. The unedited ones have a calm about them, despite > the muddiness, which I quite like, but I feel as though they could do > with something a bit more. > > Opinions, please? > > Thanks, > Bob > > > -- Entropy Seminar: The results of a five yeer studee ntu the sekend lw uf thurmodynamiks aand itz inevibl fxt hon shewb rt nslpn raq liot. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
