Hello all. The following image was PP'd two different ways. #1 with Aperture then CS3 and #2 using NX 1.3. Both were PP'd by two different people on two different machines both calibrated. I am curious to know which image you like better and why. What do you like or dislike. To me, a lot about IQ is subjective. Some like more color saturation, more contrast, and so on. I am not interested in CS3 vs. NX type stuff. Just would like to know what you think of the final image in regards to look and so on. So, which do you prefer, #1 or #2 and why? Thanks. Joe #1 vjlo {} #2 vjso {}
definitely #1 Better color, contrast and crop. BTW, This is a beautiful photograph that I would be proud to hang on my wall. Dennis
Number 1 may have better color, but overall it looks overprocessed. Number 2 looks more natural, and more like a real photograph.
#2 is my pick. It just stands out more and is more pleasing to my newbie eyes. In my opinion, the person in the background in #1 plays too much of a role in the image. Whereas, in #2, the person is more subtle and blends with the background. Paul
No. 2 for me. There is a natural tone to this, which just seems 'right'. They are both worthy pictures - I would love to have both. No1 I would put on my wall, no.2 into my portfolio..
I prefer #2 because my eyes focus on him. The person in the background catches my eye in #1. Maybe a closer crop of #1?
my vote goes to #2. in #1, the OOF person in the background is too dark and too large, drawing my eye away from the runner. in #1, the contrast is just right and the composition minimizes the OOF person. ricky
number one looks like an airbrush painting, and the exagerrated saturation makes the OOF head, as well as the entire background really, draw too much attention. number two has more realistic color, the composition works for the image. great shot that could've been in a magazine or a newspaper.
I like #2, but with the cropping used in #1 it would be even better. I'm a purist when it comes to these kinds of shots, and #1 just looks too "over baked" with softness and over saturation, my $0.02.
#2 for me, primarily because the skin looks over processed in 1. I like the crop of 1, which I would like to see applied to 2.
No. 2 for me also, I prefer the more "natural" look especially considering the lighting, in this case less is more
Definitely #2. More natural than 1. One is over processed, too saturated, edge sharpness is gone to the point that it looks too contrived. # 2 could be a touch warmer, but not to the same extent as 1. In Lightroom I would have added a touch of clarity to sharpen and add a punch to the midtones.
I also prefer #2. I like the fact that the green in the background is more subdued. In #1, it is too prominent and distracts my eye. Also, the skin in #1 looks over processed. As a couple people have mentioned, I would add a bit of contrast to #2.
