peter_stacey

@Rashed and Anders

Fred didn't say the image shouldn't be discussed, he just suggested that the use of the term "correction" when making a suggestion is limiting.

The idea that anyone has "corrected" an image is based on a belief that there must be a correct version, and generally the person making the suggestion views their version as the correct one that should be followed.

That is limited, because who is to say what is correct?

In this particular image, why does removing the power box for example, make the image more correct?

There is an argument to suggest that removing the power box makes the environment less polluted and it strengthens the nostalgic and rustic feel of the image, but it doesn't make it more correct.

It's a suggestion, based on a vision of what is important in communicating with the viewer, but not a more correct one.

That doesn't mean the suggestions are not important or without merit. We all look at things differently and discussing those differences helps everyone develop their vision. Perhaps these suggestions have also helped Claudio, but only he can answer that.

From my part, I personally see the original image as the strongest posted.

To me, the original crop provides more context for what lies outside the frame and what the general area is like. It seems very old. However the power box adds a modern element to the image and shows how even old places are still alive and continuously going through a state of change.

For me, the subject of the image is broader than just the 3 children. They are important, but so is the environment they are in, which portrays a kind of slow, simple, idilic life in a modern world and all elements of the original image are important in communicating that message to me.

Just my 0.02c.

Hi,

Nice shot of the eagle.

Only thing I would say is that it looks photoshoped and it looks like the eagle has been selected from a lighter background and placed on the dark one. I think that could really work well except for the white matte that still exists arond the head feathers.

If it was PSed, I'd suggest you go Layer-Matting-Remove White Matte before deselecting after placing the eagle on a new layer.

That should improve it immediately, although the selection looks like is could also be improved a bit and then you would produce a very strong image.

If it isn't PSed then sorry for the comments, it just doesn't look totally natural to me.

Regards,

Peter

Nice shot. To me, the mood of the photo is the subject and the only thing I think it needs additional is a person walking away from the camera about 30-40 metres away.

A hobbo or child (only if it was very safe to do so) would give the shot added appeal and would enhance the depressed mood even further.

Greg,

love the shot and I definitely like what Clint did to it. The added saturation really makes it pop.

In relation to the color space, if you just "save for web" in Photoshop, it doesn't automatically convert the image to sRGB (which is what browsers are expecting).

So if you shoot in Adobe RGB for example, when you save for web, the image can loose saturation in a browser and look a bit flat.

The best thing to do is do all your processing in Adobe RGB and then convert the color space just before saving. To do it, go under the "Edit" menu and then select "Convert to Profile".

Regards,

Peter