pics

[DavidF]

Hi

I was looking for the picture thread but couldn't see it.

Which do we think looks better version 1 or 2?

I've just obtained a more recent copy of Adobe; having a play.

 

[Telkman]

I assume you meant to compare where you'd adjusted white balance/brightness/contrast etc, but it's impossible to compare as No.2 has been horribly compressed.

 

[DavidF]

In terms of the colour balance, Mark.

 

[Telkman]

Personal preference is for the first. The second seems a little over saturated to me.

I've never bothered to properly calibrate my monitor, but from here I'd guess the reality is somewhere between the two?

 

[DavidF]

Personal preference is for the first. The second seems a little over saturated to me.

I've never bothered to properly calibrate my monitor, but from here I'd guess the reality is somewhere between the two?

Yes, I've got a running disagreement with my Dad.

He likes no 2 but then he always uses too much saturation for me.

I agree, somewhere between the two.

 

[Telkman]

Is he viewing through the same monitor as you?

The majority of monitors will display things differently - add to that peoples' own eyesight and opinions, and you're opening a can of worms!

 

[DavidF]

Is he viewing through the same monitor as you?

no.

Hes got a flat screen thingy.

(I've got a Sony Trinitron CRT)

The majority of monitors will display things differently - add to that peoples' own eyesight and opinions, and you're opening a can of worms!

Yes.

 

[Zoomer]

to improve a lot of pics the simple thing you can do is auto levels (CMD/CTRL+SHIFT+L) and auto balance (CMD/CTRL+SHIFT+B)

The to improve on that and bring out that you can just duplicate layer bring up the levels again (CMD/CTRL+L) and adjust he middle point till you get the right detail in the dark areas then delete parts of that layer as required.

the attached was only a quick example