Saturometer Needle Hits New Highs! (Film at 11, Digital at 12)

[wogears]

<p>Gaaaaack!</p>

<p>How far must one push the Saturation slider to come up with <a href="http://www.boredpanda.com/autumn-photography-2014/">these images</a>? Is there someone we can blame or sue for this?</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>It's always important to remember that different people have different tastes and that does not make things good or bad.</p>

[aplumpton]

<blockquote>

<p>".....show us the wonderful colors of autumn!"</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>So says the exhortation of Lex's link to produce images like those pictured (photoshopped). I agree with Lex. These are the "wonderful" colours of the photographer's imagination and Photoshop use and really not "of the autumn." Very kitch, if you happen to like that.</p>

[LineMartel]

<p>I have to agree with Jeff! It is art. The fact that you don't like someone's rendition or interpretation does not mean it is not good, and certainly does not mean it should not be done... . Oversaturation when used adequately to render an artistic vision is definitely not kitsch. Whether or not it is complimenting the vision of the artist might define if it is.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"I agree with Lex."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>But Arthur, Lex hasn't posted here, yet. :-) </p>

[cyanatic]

<blockquote>

<p>But Arthur, Lex hasn't posted here, yet. :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh, I think it's just a matter of time, Michael. ;-) Lex's extra-sensory perception will soon pick up the vibes of this thread. Either that or the garish orange light from some of those photos will bleed through all the way to Texas...alerting him to our presence.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=19592">Jeff Spirer</a><a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Moderator" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/mod.gif" alt="" /><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Oct 05, 2014; 08:48 p.m.</p>

 

<p>It's always important to remember that different people have different tastes and that does not make things good or bad.</p>

 

</blockquote>

 

<p>I have to reluctantly agree with Jeff. Reluctantly because although I believe in championing the cause of keeping an open mind photographically speaking, I have to be honest and say that I find some of those images a bit...how can I put this nicely? <em> Overcooked</em>. </p>

 

 

<p> </p>

 

[dave_s]

<p>Kincadesque.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"But Arthur, Lex hasn't posted here, yet. :-)"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh, but he will, he will. That guy has an opinion about everything.</p>

<p>Sometimes light and circumstances conspire to produce colors that may seem exaggerated, but the scenes really did look like that. These winter sunset skies really did look like this. They were stunning. But not terribly rare. The western sky in Texas really does take on some brilliant hues in winter, with dramatic clouds and incredible mixtures of colors.</p>

<p>These were resized JPEGs straight from the cameras. The red sky and barbed wire photo was from a Nikon D2H, which never had particularly exaggerated colors - if anything it was usually a bit too muted. The other photo may have been from the Nikon V1's vivid mode (I can't check now, my copy of Nikon ViewNX 2 keep crashing, and it's the only way to check some Nikon meta data). But even the standard color version prepped in Lightroom looks like this.</p>

<p>Sometimes Mother Nature is a drama queen.<br>

<br /><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17668989-lg.jpg" alt="Barbed wire sky fire 46" width="679" height="450" border="0" /><br>

This barbed wire sky fire photo was "too red" for Facebook. I had to desaturate a version just for Facebook, otherwise the additional JPEG compression made it look horrible. <br>

*<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17650486-md.jpg" alt="LR4_DSC_7889-1" width="680" height="455" border="0" /><br>

And this photo's colors seemed so improbable I uploaded a monochrome conversion to my publicly visible portfolio, which seemed more consistent with the other photos in this theme. But the sky really looked that way that evening. I took nearly 200 photos in the course of an hour. It was among the most spectacular skies I've ever seen.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>BTW, Les, you've been trolled by Bored Panda. While BP, 121cliches... oops, 121clicks... and other sites do often present genuinely good photography, they tend to do so with breathless enthusiasm and a handful of formulaic grabber headlines and superficially super-excitable intro paragraphs. They're mostly clickbait sites of the type beloved by Facetwitter Plus.</p>

<p>What I do like about BP and 121cloyingpix is that they've helped to promote the work of photographers whose work I really do enjoy and respect. So if that means an occasional foray into calendar and greeting card art, that's okay by me.</p>

<p>And they're still not as bad as those stupid quiz clickbait sites.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>I've worn corrective lenses since I was 8 years old, so you might say I have never experienced undistorted vision or color. It's something I'm acutely aware of and it's this that makes me purposely bump up the saturation a few notches just so I can overcompensate. </p>

[jordan2240]

<p>Some seem a bit overdone, but I find most of them to be quite appealing. But then, I always liked the look of the Kincaid paintings referenced earlier, which isn't likely to gain me much respect in the "art" world. </p>

[gordonjb]

<p>Those pumpkins could be a bit more orange.</p>

 

[wogears]

<p>Okay, I know people have different tastes, but these pictures do NOT say "Autumn" to me. They say "Oversaturated", unlike Les, er, Lex's images which resemble scenes I've witnessed.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>So if they were black and white, they would say "Undersaturated?" Because they don't resemble scenes anymore than something which is "Oversaturated."</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Les, do you find those beautiful NASA images of nebulae and galaxies equally objectionable? They all contain false colors for artistic and aesthetic purposes. In fact, we would be screaming bloody murder if our terrestrial photos were given the same level of treatment. </p>

[cyanatic]

<p><em>Some</em> of the photographs on that site are oversaturated <em>in my opinion</em>. (Other photogaphs are quite lovely.) I can't speak for anyone else who has used the term "oversaturated" but I am certainly not suggesting that there is a hard and fast rule about such things. Nor would I want there to be. No one has to justify their taste in post-processing to me. Likewise, I don't have to justify my personal preferences to them. </p>

<p>Is there a certain tone of critical snarkiness from some of the posters here (me included)? Of course. We cannot always be on our best behavior and sometimes it's okay to call dreck <em>dreck </em>and kitsch <em>kitsch. </em>Did anyone really expect an article like that one to not generate a certain amount of cattiness on photo.net? To paraphrase Harry Truman: "If you can't stand the cattiness, get out of the litterbox." (hmmm...loses something in translation there...)</p>

[MichaelChang]

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Is there a certain tone of critical snarkiness from some of the posters here (me included)?"</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not to me, Steve. <br>

<br>

Photo.net is built on critiques and opinions which by nature invites disagreements. For the most part, we're also capable of putting on any one of multiple hats depending on the discussion - we might put on our lab coats, or start stroking our chins, or we might put on our impartial pedagogical hat if it's deemed appropriate.<br>

<br>

I too find the photos "oversaturated" but I also recognize, as we all do, that it's individual differences (and preferences) we must accept from others. The topic is also generic and beaten to death to such an extent that no one will feel compelled to write a redundant in-depth essay, so instead we summarize with short sentences that will invariably lose the nuance of diplomacy. <br>

</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>So. I think Van Gogh would be better if his pictures were sharper. How about Salvador Dali. Someone needs to straighten those watches. I have a picture in the PN autumn spread that was taken as the sun was rising. The colors were there but I certainly can't say because I don't remember if I added some saturation. I don't like adding too much saturation in LR because it adds yellow and changes the WB. I probably did add some saturation. You all can judge for yourselves. As a matter of personal practice I don't make negative judgments about others post processing or pictures. Sometimes I go for exaggeration just for the fun of doing it. So Les, sue me. Seriously I like to find the good in pictures made by people other than me. They make me a bit humble compared to my own work. I like to stay on the positive side of things. I really like the deer with the back light and several others. <br /> No accounting for tastes. Dick</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>When shooting RAW I often have to boost the saturation levels, also the Vibrance and Clarity levels, but when shooting in JPEG with my camera, I might decide to lower them on occasion.</p>

<p>I'm thinking I might try shooting in <strong>Custom White balance</strong> mode more often to keep me from sitting behind a computer terminal all day long pushing dials. However that is not always possible such as when shooting nature shots.</p>

<p>I like boosting the Red and Blue channels myself sometimes the Green, but when he green grass starts looking like Kryptonite, and the red starts looking like Scarlet this is when I back off! Some people don't...</p>

<p>The monitor on my computer is pretty dull, so pictures that look flat on this terminal might look over saturated on another. Not sure how I can avoid this other than buying a new monitor.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>The notable difference, to me, between Lex's photos and the photos in the article is that Lex's photos say something personal to me, have a point of view and a mood. I get a sense of isolation and quiet from Lex's photo. Interesting that such saturated colors can feel quiet.</p>

<p>The photos in the article give me merely a sense of heightened (exaggerated) prettiness. That's it. Most of them are hollow and uninteresting to me and would be so even if less saturated.</p>

<p>It's not the saturation <em>per se</em> that I find problematic. It's that the underlying photo isn't compelling to me and the saturation just seems to be trying too hard but with not much raw material to work with. Most look like just a bunch of rote scenes. Tried and true.</p>

[Damon DAmato]

<blockquote>

<p>So if they were black and white, they would say "Undersaturated?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Yes. As they should to anyone with cones as well as rods in their retinas.</p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>As compositions go, they're great. I'm not sure about the colour though...</p>

<p>With black & white, you know what you're looking at. With colour, you can't always be sure if the colours were that strong in reality. I do prefer b&w, almost always, but I appreciate colour, too. In fact, as far as jobs go, I can't wait for the one where the client will let me use b&w exclusively. :-)</p>

<p>Those overdone HDR images? Now those, my friends, are trash.</p>

[tom_harvey3]

<p>Kincaid-esque with a Ken Rockwell oversaturation infatuation</p>

[wogears]

<p>Just a point of information. The serial elevator-pisser spelled his name "Kinkade".</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Agree with Karim, the compositions are good, colors generally way overdone. As a point of interest, my casual observation seem to suggest that US viewers/photogs are more tolerant of hyper saturated images compared to European viewers (no data on Canada...) <em>De gustibus non disputandem est</em> etc. etc. I wonder if Thomas Kinkade has found the afterlife as colorful and kitschy as his works? If so, give me the other place any day.</p>