Dolomites West October 2015

[Hans Kruse]

I was in the Dolomites, with Hans, this June - highly recommended trip to anyone who can keep up with him for 9 days!

Without fail, every single time I have shown photos from this trip, someone has commented on the saturation. And I have honestly had to say I have desaturated those shots slightly, as no one would believe they were not pumped up if I just ran a straight conversion.

You've got to see the Dolomites in June to believe it with your own eyes!

Thanks Bill, it will be interesting to see if you can keep up with me once more

Again regarding saturation, contrast etc. in post processing is a matter of taste and not for me, at least, to present the scenes as I "saw them". Many use that term to justify a certain look or post processing. If that works, it is fine. For me it is not the criteria I go with.

[LesPalenik]

Hans, Your shots here are not 'oversaturated', but merely feature strongly saturated colors. 
I find the good taste with which you have deployed the strong saturation to be a pleasure for my eyes, which are tired of the common, amateurish, mindlessly oversaturated style that we see every day on the web and often in advertising.  Bravo.
Also, your compositions are superior to the other few competing samples offered.

Exactly!
It just happens that some people, including me, Hans, Alain Briot and Peter Lik like saturated colors, and there are some who like subtle coloring. You won't believe it, but there are even individuals who will desaturate their images completely.
Similar phenomenon occurs when men are presented with images of women. Some like them slim and subtle, others big and with pronounced features.
No need to quarrel - there is a picture for each man - that's what they call democracy.
 

[john beardsworth]

Exactly!
It just happens that some people, including me, Hans, Alain Briot and Peter Lik like saturated colors, and there are some who like subtle coloring. You won't believe it, but there are even individuals who will desaturate their images completely.
Similar phenomenon occurs when men are presented with images of women. Some like them slim and subtle, others big and with pronounced features.
No need to quarrel - there is a picture for each man - that's what they call democracy.

It isn't about liking saturated colours though, is it? Surely it's more about whether they are believable or pimped up? Using your analogy, do you appreciate someone whose looks obviously depend on boob jobs and other surgery as much as someone who looks real?

I can just about believe the more saturated photos here, so it's a general point.

John

[jeremyrh]

Hmm .. believable in what sense? I think our eyes and memories are not objective recorders of what is in front of us - we can think of a moon as being enormous at certain times, though we know for a fact that it subtends a zillionth of a degree at our eyes. Should the photo record that objective fact, or our subjective impression that it was huge?

I have stood beside Hans at a number of these locations, and been overwhelmed by the colour in the sky - that was my subjective impression. However, I am prepared to accept (as I suspect Hans will also) that the colour in his photo does not match that which was actually in the sky. It is his interpretation, rather than a record. I don't think Hans is making a dogmatic statement here - that was rather Petrus, with his drive-by comment.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There is something called artistic freedom/artistic expression. Visual arts are not intended to be a reproduction of the subject but an artistic interpretation.

Personally, I have a preference for a bit more restrained colour, but that doesn't give me the right to say what preferences other  photographers should have.

I have taken part in two of Hans's workshops, and the reason I was doing it was that I was tempted by his photography.

Best regards
Erik

It isn't about liking saturated colours though, is it? Surely it's more about whether they are believable or pimped up? Using your analogy, do you appreciate someone whose looks obviously depend on boob jobs and other surgery as much as someone who looks real?

I can just about believe the more saturated photos here, so it's a general point.

John

[Petrus]

I don't think Hans is making a dogmatic statement here -ns is making a dogmatic statement that was rather Petrus, with his drive-by comment.

Again: I was commenting the statement that those photographs were "technically perfect". With colors so much off (I start to see some others also admit they are over (strongly?) saturated, or whatever) they certainly can not be "technically perfect". The RAW file might be.

While I am at it, when is Hans going to give samples of my bad compositions and give some (free?) advice? If he is not, I maintain that his behavior was childish.

[john beardsworth]

Hmm .. believable in what sense? I think our eyes and memories are not objective recorders of what is in front of us - we can think of a moon as being enormous at certain times, though we know for a fact that it subtends a zillionth of a degree at our eyes. Should the photo record that objective fact, or our subjective impression that it was huge?

In the sense that one could reasonably believe that we might have seen those colours with our own eyes, had we been there at the time.

I also know the region quite well, so that's why I said "I can just about believe" their colours.

Personally, I have a preference for a bit more restrained colour, but that doesn't give me the right to say what preferences other  photographers should have.

But you have every right to say what you think of the resulting "photograph", if that's what it remains.

John

[ErikKaffehr]

So,

I prefer Matisse to Picasso, so I should teach Picasso how to paint?

Best regards
Erik

In the sense that one could reasonably believe that we might have seen those colours with our own eyes, had we been there at the time.


But you have every right to say what you think of the resulting "photograph", if that's what it remains.

John

[john beardsworth]

I prefer Matisse to Picasso, so I should teach Picasso how to paint?

We're talking landscape photography, not abstract painting, and judging not someone's preferences but the result. How unbelievably-saturated can a "photograph" become before one expresses a judgement about it?

[jeremyrh]

While I am at it, when is Hans going to give samples of my bad compositions and give some (free?) advice? If he is not, I maintain that his behavior was childish.

You seem to be upset by someone making an arbitrary, off the cuff criticism of your photographs.

[Petrus]

You seem to be upset by someone making an arbitrary, off the cuff criticism of your photographs.

Quite frankly I do. It is not that I can not stand criticism or even want it (I have asked Hans to elaborate with examples and to give his expert advice), but in this context it was totally out of place and childish. If we are talking about technical perfection and saturation, what the hell does it do with my inability to compose a photograph? We can have another thread about that it deemed necessary.

I have shown a couple of my photographs here on various threads + the recent Tibet article, and the compositional deficiencies were never mentioned then.

Waiting for an answer from Hans.

[hubell]

Personally, I think the artistic merits of Mr. Petrus' photographs are beside the point here. His original criticism of the photographs that were put up at the start of the thread was not in any way personally insulting. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his criticism(and I am sure many would agree), I feel that anyone who puts up their photos as examples of their work is opening themselves up to the expression of opinions about the artistic merits of the work. I consider it childish for someone to respond to a reasonable criticism of their work by criticizing the photographic capabilities of the critic. Of course, it is also possible that the OP put up the photos at issue without any expectation of aesthetic criticism. They were just a not so subtle form of advertising for his workshops.

[AreBee]

Hans,

In your comment about oversaturation you just forget to add: In my opinion or for my taste!

No.

...to me.

[Hans Kruse]

Personally, I think the artistic merits of Mr. Petrus' photographs are beside the point here. His original criticism of the photographs that were put up at the start of the thread was not in any way personally insulting. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his criticism(and I am sure many would agree), I feel that anyone who puts up their photos as examples of their work is opening themselves up to the expression of opinions about the artistic merits of the work. I consider it childish for someone to respond to a reasonable criticism of their work by criticizing the photographic capabilities of the critic. Of course, it is also possible that the OP put up the photos at issue without any expectation of aesthetic criticism. They were just a not so subtle form of advertising for his workshops.

I don't find the comments from Petrus a critique. Using words as badly oversaturated and totally over the top is not meant to be a critique in my book. Personally I don't know why Petrus expresses himself this way. In fact the comment is quite over the top. I must have struck something in him with my pictures to provoke such a reaction. I did not mention workshops in my post and is a professional photographer not allowed to post here? If anything they were posted to show some of  my work and show the locations I have been shooting and hence the posting was in Landscape Photography Locations. I welcome critique, but not condescending remarks. People can disagree as their taste is different which I think we all know. There was not really any critique in the thread. Only comments about saturation. I would assume that most photographers would not even regard this as the most important part of pictures. But a few negative comments will not stop further posting of pictures

[Petrus]

I don't find the comments from Petrus a critique. Using words as badly oversaturated and totally over the top is not meant to be a critique in my book.

"Going to your website I see a lot of poorly composed pictures." That sounds like a critique.  Firstly, I do not have a website. If you mean the Flicker pages, why do you not give some examples of my badly composed pictures?

Do you think that your over saturated images somehow get better if I compose my own photos badly? They do not. Photographic technique does not work that way, your pictures look over saturated no matter how I frame my shots. What kind of teacher and pedagogue are you, if you think that way?

I would seriously think twice before taking part and paying for your workshops, as we can enjoy your thin skinned childish reactions here for free. 

[jeremyrh]

Do you think that your over saturated images somehow get better if I compose my own photos badly? They do not. Photographic technique does not work that way, your pictures look over saturated no matter how I frame my shots. What kind of teacher and pedagogue are you, if you think that way?

My guess is that Hans has no particular opinion on your photos, and was simply illustrating that destructive off-hand criticism has no value. His point seems to have been proved, in view of your defensive reaction.

[Piboy]

Hans,
Great stuff as always. My solution to those who don't like the saturation is go there and judge the palette for themselves. If it is too intense for there liking convert to B and W 

dolomites b and w

Happy New Year to all
Sam

[Petrus]

Cheaper solution would be to make one of the RAWs available for download, and those interested could make neutral conversions with their favorite converters.

[jeremyrh]

Cheaper solution would be to make one of the RAWs available for download, and those interested could make neutral conversions with their favorite converters.

On that subject - a while ago Kevin was challenged over the treatment of a shot of Glencoe, and proposed a "process-off" with Joe Cornish and others (IIRC). What happened to that?

[Jeremy Roussak]

Cheaper solution would be to make one of the RAWs available for download, and those interested could make neutral conversions with their favorite converters.

Cheaper, but wholly pointless. You could create a washed-out, desaturated scene which you wouldn't know didn't resemble the original because you'd not bothered to go there. What would that prove?

Jeremy