Voluptuously ....

[evacguy]

..... red

• ILCE-7M4
• FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II
• 99.0 mm
• ƒ/22
• 1/100 sec
• ISO 1000

• ILCE-7M4
• FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II
• 99.0 mm
• ƒ/22
• 1/100 sec
• ISO 1000

• ILCE-7M4
• FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II
• 99.0 mm
• ƒ/22
• 1/100 sec
• ISO 1000

 

[evacguy]

..... redView attachment 42771View attachment 42772View attachment 42773

Guys, do you think I've over done the editing, are the images too saturated? Below is the unedited image.

• ILCE-7M4
• FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II
• 99.0 mm
• ƒ/22
• 1/100 sec
• ISO 1000

 

[alexpler]

I like the edited colors.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

When you compare the two, the edited ones look more powerful. But in all honesty, when I checked them out earlier on their own I thought you done a nice job.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Oversaturated? Maybe by a very thin margin.
I think many people wouldn't even bat an eyelid at the saturation because so many cellphones tend to oversaturate images (I'm looking at you Samsung Galaxy), and that is now the most common way the masses take and view photos, so it has become the norm. You know what I mean?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I feel disappointed

 

[evacguy]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate your comments and constructive feedback. I agree that my edited images may be a tad over saturated, but I don't think that the image is unpleasant or unfaithfull to the original. The reason I asked is that I was heavily criticised by a person in another group (local facebook photography group I'm in), who said my images were awful and artificial. This is the same person who criticised my street photograph about a month ago of the people exercising in public on the heath. The only time she comments on my images is to say how bad they are. While I think whether you like something is down to your particular taste, and I don't mind negative but constructive comments (that is afterall how we learn), perhaps she is not justified in saying the image is awful, artifical and fake.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate your comments and constructive feedback. I agree that my edited images may be a tad over saturated, but I don't think that the image is unpleasant or unfaithfull to the original. The reason I asked is that I was heavily criticised by a person in another group (local facebook photography group I'm in), who said my images were awful and artificial. This is the same person who criticised my street photograph about a month ago of the people exercising in public on the heath. The only time she comments on my images is to say how bad they are. While I think whether you like something is done to your particular taste, and I don't mind negative but constructive comments (that is afterall how we learn), perhaps she is not justified in saying the image is awful, artifical and fake.

Ignore people like that, they are keyboard warriors, always spoiling for a fight. I hate the Facen=book groups for that reason, it's full of them, and trust me, unless you are American, or your surname is Phan, you get no comments on any shot you post, so I don't. I just look at the shots and comment on the ones that deserve special mention.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate your comments and constructive feedback. I agree that my edited images may be a tad over saturated, but I don't think that the image is unpleasant or unfaithfull to the original. The reason I asked is that I was heavily criticised by a person in another group (local facebook photography group I'm in), who said my images were awful and artificial. This is the same person who criticised my street photograph about a month ago of the people exercising in public on the heath. The only time she comments on my images is to say how bad they are. While I think whether you like something is done to your particular taste, and I don't mind negative but constructive comments (that is afterall how we learn), perhaps she is not justified in saying the image is awful, artifical and fake.

And does that person post pictures? I encountered this on Youtube, keyboard warriors who talk smack and then when you look them up they didn't contribute anything to the community (no videos posted) except commentary/criticism.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate your comments and constructive feedback. I agree that my edited images may be a tad over saturated, but I don't think that the image is unpleasant or unfaithfull to the original. The reason I asked is that I was heavily criticised by a person in another group (local facebook photography group I'm in), who said my images were awful and artificial. This is the same person who criticised my street photograph about a month ago of the people exercising in public on the heath. The only time she comments on my images is to say how bad they are. While I think whether you like something is done to your particular taste, and I don't mind negative but constructive comments (that is afterall how we learn), perhaps she is not justified in saying the image is awful, artifical and fake.

I've never had social media because I think it's a cowardly and fake world. It gives those who would be too timid to speak in the real world a voice of opinion, it's mostly a place of highlight reels leaving out the back story. And some people are just meant to shut the **** up, they need to sit in the corner scared like they are when they aren't behind their phone screen!

What I've noticed with newbies me included, we go through little phases of certain things in editing, compositions, camera use, trying to feel out what works and what doesn't. At the end of the day the images are never awful, just a bit off the mark.

Personally Ed, I was impressed with these when I first seen them yesterday, that's why I liked them. I thought you'd done well.