Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: which one?  (Read 978 times)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1818
which one?
« on: August 09, 2012, 10:41:09 AM »

which one do you prefer, if any? they are in order, minimally corrected, somehow corrected, mostly corrected.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 10:52:23 AM by armand »
Logged

francois

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8139
Re: which one?
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2012, 11:26:47 AM »

Personally, I prefer the uncorrected images. I find them much more dynamic than the more corrected one. I would need more time to decide between the "somewhat" and the "minimally" images but now, the "minimally" corrected photo gets my preference.
Logged
Francois

shutterpup

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: which one?
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2012, 12:30:17 PM »

Personally, I prefer the uncorrected images. I find them much more dynamic than the more corrected one. I would need more time to decide between the "somewhat" and the "minimally" images but now, the "minimally" corrected photo gets my preference.

Me too. And the minimally corrected one gets my vote as well.
Logged

jule

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 738
    • http://www.juliestephenson.net
Re: which one?
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2012, 10:46:35 PM »

which one do you prefer, if any? they are in order, minimally corrected, somehow corrected, mostly corrected.
I like the first one..minimally corrected because it seems to ahve more 'energy'. Now I can't fully expain the term 'energy'.... but it seems to be more - dynamic/fluid/have more mo-jo.  (and I can't describe mo-jo either; but for those whose native language is English, you may have an appreciation of what I am trying to describe ... :) )

The others seem more restrained and stilted.

Julie

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11196
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: which one?
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2012, 11:58:56 PM »

I hate siding with the majority, but I too prefer the minimal one.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1818
Re: which one?
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2012, 09:25:13 AM »

Thanks for the replies. That's how I felt also but I recall some people being quite into perspective correction, tilt-shift lenses and all that stuff and I was curious how the majority thinks like.
Logged

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1991
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: which one?
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2012, 11:19:51 AM »

Thanks for the replies. That's how I felt also but I recall some people being quite into perspective correction, tilt-shift lenses and all that stuff and I was curious how the majority thinks like.

I'm with the top one, as well. Although if I didn't have it to compare to, the middle one would also work. In this case, the movement created by the uncorrected perspective adds to the photo. The bottom one is too static. While there is a case to be made for tilt-shift, this image seems to work better uncorrected.
Logged
Terry McDonald
Revealing the art inherent in nature - visit luxBorealis.com.
Have a read of my PhotoBlog and subscribe!

cmi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 492
Re: which one?
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2012, 07:20:02 PM »

Thanks for the replies. That's how I felt also but I recall some people being quite into perspective correction, tilt-shift lenses and all that stuff and I was curious how the majority thinks like.

The perspective upwards is fine and makes the image work. What disturbs me is this tilt of the vertical lines to the right. It is marginal, works against that upwards perspective, and more visible in the first image. I probably would either make it stronger or remove it.
 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up