OFFICIAL Kings Canyon Camp Swank Thread

[Alex]

Yes, they're oversaturated. But except for the meadow photo that is mostly because I prefer that for viewing online (the meadow had issuse and I didn't feel like going back to the original) and since, generally, I am the only one who ever looks at the pictures I'm the one I'm pleasing.

If I were to print any of them I would return to the original files and reprocess with that in mind.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

Don't know why it never occurred to me to ask this before, but Kevy, do you guys do art prints by any chance?

No: high volume (10,000 - 50,000,000) print (much of it direct mail marketing).

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I love that over-saturated look.

Tangent - I read an article about how the over-saturated, hyper-real colors borne of photoshop have become standard among popular Flickr photographers. It talked about how photography and photo editing that's specifically for display on monitors and handheld devices has become something of its own style. New tools, new ways to view photos, new style. There was also a mention of the fact that sometimes pranksters post classic art photos anonymously, and the comments fields fill with people ripping them apart.

[Disneyphile]

There's definitely a huge difference between RGB and CMYK colors. Kevy is surrounded by the latter, so I can see why it would concern him.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Disneyphile

There's definitely a huge difference between RGB and CMYK colors. Kevy is surrounded by the latter, so I can see why it would concern him.

True, but even in an RGB world, the colors still look over saturated to me.

Don't get me started on a discussion on color theory and reproduction.

[Disneyphile]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

True, but even in an RGB world, the colors still look over saturated to me.

Good point, because my scopes would probably say it's off-the-scale too.

Don't get me started on a discussion on color theory and reproduction.

Actually, I would probably find that enjoyable.

[Alex]

I don't need to be defended (if that is what anybody is trying to do).

I'm fine with any criticism that comes along and appreciate it when it does (in fact, while taking the King's Canyon pictures I had a conversation with someone, I forget whom, about how I never really trust what people say about photo quality when I put them online since pretty much every photo posted by any person of any quality generates the same ecstatic response).

So, anything actually approaching critique is quite valuable. That's not to say I'll necessarily take it to heart. As I said, most of the photos were tweaked to a view I find desirable since I am the only one looking at them (and I am trying create not a journalistic view of the scene but rather recapture my memory of the scene which isn't journalistic), plus I won't make any claim to any great skill.

If I were less lazy, I would return to the original when sharing online and produce a more understated version for sharing. But I am lazy.

But I do appreciate Kevy's honesty.

[innerSpaceman]

Everything looks so different screen-to-screen, I find it impossible to arrive at a universally accepted wonderfulness.

[MouseWife]

Like Alex, I play with my pictures. Sometimes I prefer it one way, other times another.

But, I do not have the skill to do so while taking the picture, like I've heard Alex, GD and some others doing. Like, the shutter speed, etc. Don't have a clue what those things mean. I've been using a digital camera mostly, have an automatic 35mm with a nice telephoto lense and I also have an SLR but haven't used it much because I really don't know how to. My daughter gave it to me when she bought a SLR/Digital camera.

I think it is wonderful that everyone can fix up the pictures the way they want them. I have a few that I want to enlarge to frame but I just can't decide exactly which ones. Every time I go, I get more to choose from. I just don't have enough walls!

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Alex

I don't need to be defended (if that is what anybody is trying to do).

I was more defending myself than you. I'm well aware that the color is not "natural" and that it's oversaturated and that it would require substantial tweaking to produce the same result in a physical reproduction. But my appreciation for the photo and color have nothing to do with such technical nuances and are purely aesthetic. I enjoyed the vibrant sky in the first and the deep blue of the water in the second as seen on my screen, whether natural, or printable, or not.

(in fact, while taking the King's Canyon pictures I had a conversation with someone, I forget whom, about how I never really trust what people say about photo quality when I put them online since pretty much every photo posted by any person of any quality generates the same ecstatic response).

'twas I. And it made me wonder if you'd seen the Ira Glass clip that LSPE posted a bit ago. Not so much about taking critique from others, but about accepting the fact that you are going to judge your own work harshly until you've developed the skill necessary to satisfy your self. Total tangent, but it was a good piece of advice.