Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
Thread started 11 Apr 2010 (Sunday) 23:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Higher contrast vs lower contrast

 
K-Mount
Member
75 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2009
     
Apr 11, 2010 23:01 |  #1

Need help on deciding which one, I feel like the higher contrast one looks too processed but I'm not quite sure. I like the natural look of the less-contrasty one but I'm not quite sure if I should keep that one.

(Ignore the comparison regarding this): The more contrasty one, I did some burning and dodging to get the eye to pop out more as well as removing the nasty window glare on the neck.

IMAGE: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2372/4513451882_5c5401570b_o.jpg

IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vk2gwk
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
13,359 posts
Gallery: 332 photos
Likes: 1836
Joined Jun 2009
Location: One Mile Beach, NSW 2316, Australia
     
Apr 12, 2010 02:03 |  #2

The first one is best, but it is a pity that you cannot get the eyes brighter and more detail in the nose. If you shot in RAW you might try with ARC - selective exposure brush to get more detail in the eyes and other dark areas.


My name is Henk. and I believe "It is all in the eye of the beholder....."
Image Editing is allowed. Please explain what you did!
Canon R5, R,, RF24-105/1:4 + RF70-200mm F/2.8 + RF15-35mm F/2.8 + 50mm 1.4 USM + Sigma 150-600mm Sports + RF100mm F/2.8 + GODOX V860 IIC+ 430EX + YN568EXII, triggers, reflectors, umbrellas and some more bits and pieces...
Photos on: Flickr! (external link) and on my own web site. (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Katalyst
Senior Member
Avatar
812 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Feb 2010
Location: The Netherlands
     
Apr 12, 2010 03:09 |  #3

I life first better as well... Then again, I'm a sucker for darker images somehow!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joedlh
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,511 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 684
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Long Island, NY, N. America, Sol III, Orion Spur, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Cluster, Laniakea.
     
Apr 12, 2010 11:25 |  #4

It looks like there's some glare in the first, contributing to a fog-like aura. You fixed it a little, but the eyes still seem to be not dark enough. I'd prefer the pupils to be as black as one perceives them.


Joe
Gear: Kodak Instamatic, Polaroid Swinger. Oh you meant gear now. :rolleyes:
http://photo.joedlh.ne​t (external link)
Editing ok

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K-Mount
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
75 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2009
     
Apr 12, 2010 15:44 as a reply to  @ joedlh's post |  #5

Thanks for it all you guys, I really had to amp the contrast for both the second and the first. I was shooting through thick glass with a cheap Kenko MC UV filter attached. Pretty much why it was so foggy and glarey.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

937 views & 0 likes for this thread, 4 members have posted to it.
Higher contrast vs lower contrast
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Discussion Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Marcsaa
474 guests, 156 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.