Need advice

Since most of my photos are automotive related I decided to post this here. If this doesn't belong in this forum would a moderator please move it where it should be. Thanks.

I recently bought a Color Munki Display to calibrate my monitor. Since then I have also been re editing some of my older photos and soft proofing them in Lightroom. Below are two of the same images. The first one is a first edit done with my monitor calibrated to factory settings. The second has been readjusted for my monitor after calibrating it with the Color Munki and soft proofing in Lightroom. I have corrected the gamma for print only not for monitor display. So there are some minor gamma issues in the second image, not enough that I was overly concerned with though. Correcting it for monitor swings the gamma back slight from where I wanted it for print, so this is my happy medium. Please let me know what differences you are seeing between the two. I could really use the feedback on this. Would like to know the areas with issues that I may need to work on.
Thanks in advance

First version monitor at factory settings.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nzqB​pY

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nGAz​mp

I've set up my monitor more for prints than for inet jpegs.
I like the car detail in #2 better, except for the blown trunk & sky. Do you have Layer Masks to work with?

Yes I do. The car was separated from the back ground in a layer mask so I could bring out more contrast between it and the car. How blowed out is it? It is blowed out slightly on my monitor, but not excessively!

The right side of the sky looks pretty blown to me. You can use the Info Tool to confirm it in PS. Anything over 255/255/255 is blown & without detail.

How does the right side of this look on your monitor?
http://smg.photobucket​.com …rent=grayscale_​adjust.jpg

I am showing in the lower 250's around the back end of the car in PS. Average would be around 252/252/252 I would say. At the brightest point in the sky I am still only around 253/253/ 253. Nothing higher than that in the image on my screen.

From your link, z is the brightest of coarse but only slightly brighter than y on my monitor.

Are you thinking my calibration may still be off or do I just have the image slightly over exposed?

liquorboxracing wrote in post #16922965
I am showing in the lower 250's around the back end of the car in PS. Average would be around 252/252/252 I would say. At the brightest point in the sky I am still only around 253/253/ 253. Nothing higher than that in the image on my screen.

From your link, z is the brightest of coarse but only slightly brighter than y on my monitor.

Are you thinking my calibration may still be off...

255 should read 255 no matter what your calibration is.

It's not that " the image" is slightly over exposed. It's that a part of it looks to be. This is normal when we try to convert what we see to a medium that has much less latitude. Which is why I use Layer Masks, & others use HDR.
If you shot in RAW mode, you can probably pull more detail out of that sky.

In the never ending quest for more detail and no blown out areas we are often left with a far less attractive image. To me the first image is much better, the highlights on the car (as well as the dark bits) reveal the shape and add drama. The second image is too bright (shows too much detail) and too vibrant.

But, at the end of the day, each to their own. Print one off, if YOU like it, stick with those settings.