Need help on whats best on the exposes

[MidKnight]

What you'll see here is 2 sets of pictures that ive processed in differant ways, please take a close look and tell me which is better and any other thoughts please.

thanks
Click here (http://www.midknight.com.au/temp/)

[mvrekum]

I like the b-versions better, they have more contrast. The a-versions are lighter and show more detail in the dark areas. Of course it is what ever you prefer, but like I said I'll go for the darker B.

Martin

[cityboy_ca]

I like the more vivid colours of the 'B' versions - in the first picture the soil and sky really benefit from the richer colours.

[Laziferous]

I say "b" for the first one, and "a" for the second. The sky is a little bright in the "b" version of the second IMO.

[MidKnight]

ok ive added "C" now, tell me what u think?

[mvrekum]

For the first one I stay with "B". The "C" version is a bit to saturated.

For the second one however I shift my choice to "C".

Martin

[MidKnight]

im trying to find a nice workflow with converting the RAW to TIFF, its not an easy job to find what suits.

[chris.bailey]

What you'll see here is 2 sets of pictures that ive processed in differant ways, please take a close look and tell me which is better and any other thoughts please.

thanks
Click here (http://www.midknight.com.au/temp/)

At first glance the b and c versions look more appealing but I think you may have pushed them a little far. The soil on the first one looks a lot more natural in the a version, for instance. I tend to be a bit conservative in the Raw conversion parameters and then go a bit further in PS if the shot needs it. Pushing the levels, saturation etc is ok but you need to make sure that everything remains natural.

[MidKnight]

What you'll see here is 2 sets of pictures that ive processed in differant ways, please take a close look and tell me which is better and any other thoughts please.

thanks
Click here (http://www.midknight.com.au/temp/)

At first glance the b and c versions look more appealing but I think you may have pushed them a little far. The soil on the first one looks a lot more natural in the a version, for instance. I tend to be a bit conservative in the Raw conversion parameters and then go a bit further in PS if the shot needs it. Pushing the levels, saturation etc is ok but you need to make sure that everything remains natural.

Well these conversations are done with C1, in photoshop im having a problem that the converted TIFF looks all washed out compared to the RAW file, and i haven't changed a thing, which i can't understand why the TIFF should look any differant from the RAW at all, which is actually not bad at all.

[stopbath]

Of the first cluster (the fields) the A version has much better hightlights in the clouds, but there are no blacks at all. The B version has better blacks. The C version is a bit too bright in the colours.
There is no best here...

The second cluster, is sort of the same. The A version has better clouds, but the B version has better shadows. The C version seems too saturated.
Again, no clear best image.

Seems that the contrast needs to be increased but without the sacrifice of detail in the highlights or shadows.