The first image with more contrast.
Critique Style Requested: Standard
The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
On December 23th I posted the same photo but with a different post production. Now I am no more sure about what I did and I have tried an alternative editing with more light and less contrast, that is a bit pictorial. Now I need your support for understandig if the new version is better or worse of the previous editing.
Specific Feedback
Do you think that this image is better of the one posted on December 23th?
Technical Details
Z 7ii, Nikkor Z 28-75mm at 60mm - f/11, 1/350s, ISO 400 hand held
I also paint and I never know when to stop.
The first image is my pick.
The hills in the middle of the new image draw my eye right to them, which I do not like. In the first image, my eye moved around the image perfectly.
Again I love the first image everything is perfect.
Thanks
Steve
1 Like
I didnât see the first version, but this one is wonderful. The tonal variations are nicely handled with a lot of contrast adding definition and texture. I love all the curving lines and shapes. The little houses atop the hill add a great point of interest. The only thing that bothers me is the wedge of almost white sky at the top.
I prefer the original image with less light and more contrast, although this version is also very good. On the original, I was already caught by the thumbnail shot, whereas on this one, I feel that I need to see the larger image to appreciate more.
I sugggest you provide a link to the image being compared to.
Hi @Giuseppe_Guadagno, what a beautiful area you live in! Wow! I took a look at your first version of this image and definitely prefer it. This one is just too light and lacking in contrast. My eye doesnât know where to settle.
I love the first image you posted, @Giuseppe_Guadagno! Better contrast, more powerful impact. That being said, perhaps there is a version between the two. I say this because I like seeing a bit of detail in the darker green area, and I like the softness of the hills in this version, but it needs a bit more âpopâ to it.
Giuseppe, again you have taken us to such an excitting location. I prefer the second one. This is a very âbusyâ scene with a lot of shadows and bright areas. The first makes it even âbussierâ in my opinion. I am looking for a more peaceful composition. I downloaded it and worked with it in PS because I wasnât sure that the wide toneal range could be softened. I used the burning tool on a very low setting to soften both the mid tones and the highlights. Then I applied a simple vinette to focus on the two houses. I am not sure that the subtle changes are obvious here. They were on PS. Again thanks for this wonderful scene.
Giuseppe, a wonderful photo. I particularly enjoy the subtle shadows of the undulating hillsides to give depth to the hills. The softness of the light is a great quality of this image. I also like the sinuous lines throughout the image.
I think this image could be improved through a lower vantage point to enable the buildings and the hill they rest on to stand as the horizon. That would convey a greater strength to the buildings and enable the hill to dominate the photo as subject. In this composition I am distracted by the background hills conflicting with the primary hill and the buildings. Regardless, a lovely image.
I was on holiday for the Christmas time and I was very happy to find so many and gratifying comments upon my return home for the photo Twin houses a bit pictorial. I am sorry for the delay in my replies.
First of all I try to put in practice the always good advise of Igor Donkov re-posting the first version more contrasted.
@Steve_Rosendahl thanks for having answered my question expressing your preference for the first more contrasted version. Thanks again.
@Chris_Baird thanks for your opinion very grateful for me. I am glad to read that you instead prefer the second version more pictorial. For the sky I understand that technically it is not a good thing but I usually prefer a sky and a backgroung more light, soft and less saturated because it seems to me less invasive and disturbing the design of the composition. I include the sky in my photo only if unavoidable. I hope I have explained myself.
@Cathy_Proenza and @Susanna_Euston thanks for helping me making the choise for the more contrasted version.
1 Like
The rework looks excellent on my monitor. The original looks feeble compared to it. The image looks stylized somehow, like an abstraction of sorts.
@brenda_tharp your comment let me think about a compromise that may be could solve my doubt between the first version very contrasted and the second with very low contrast. Let me try.
@Barbara_Djordjevic I love your image. As a pictorial image your work is excellent so soft and clean. If at the end I will keep my mind for a pictorial image your work will be my guide. At present I am uncertain between a pictorial version, like yours, and the compromise posted in my answer to Brenda Tharp. I normally donât like compromises but in photography sometimes they solve.
@Igor_Doncov I am glad to read that you too prefer the pictorial image. Thanks for your valued comment.
