Before and after....

TelePaul

Here's a very old shot that was pretty average. Nice colours but a horrible background, various other imperfections.



Here it is after a bit of processing (done by a mate!). Some dodging, motion filter added to the water, gradient filter on the sky, Gaussian blue filter on the top third to smooth things out.



Here's another one. Processing is less severe.

kjt

To be honest I'd prefer the 1st shot

TelePaul

kjt wrote: »

To be honest I'd prefer the 1st shot

Cool, why's that? I liked it when I took it but I think the motion blur and tobacco sky look great.

Fajitas!

I like the toning, and motion blur in the water, actually, I really like the motion blur in the water. The tilt shift effect isn't done very well... even the pole on the harbour is half in half out.

Anyways, it brings out a lot more in the image, I think.

Oh, I don't like the edge, i'm afraid

TelePaul

Fajitas! wrote: »

I like the toning, and motion blur in the water, actually, I really like the motion blur in the water. The tilt shift effect isn't done very well... even the pole on the harbour is half in half out.

Anyways, it brings out a lot more in the image, I think.

Oh, I don't like the edge, i'm afraid

Tilt shift....hmmm.....

Yeah the edge....the border?

440Hz

The motion blur works very well, and the toning is very catching too. I do really like the original too though, they are both very different takes, and have their own individual merits. Nice example of how the feel of a shot can change so dramatically.

dazftw

both images are nice, prefer the 1st one though..

I use to love using borders when I 1st started taking pictures now I just barely ever use them at all.

Fajitas!

TelePaul wrote: »

Tilt shift....hmmm.....

Yeah the edge....the border?

The blur in the background, it looks very 'PS tilt shift' - Do a google and you'll see what I mean, or google fake depth of field.

Aye, the blurred edge around the image...

Ricky91t

I like the second one it focuses you alot more on the boats ...The first picture is too busy(if you know what i mean )Welcome back btw!

TelePaul

Fajitas! wrote: »

The blur in the background, it looks very 'PS tilt shift' - Do a google and you'll see what I mean, or google fake depth of field.

Aye, the blurred edge around the image...

Cool, guess I still have some tweaking to do!

TelePaul

ricky91t wrote: »

I like the second one it focuses you alot more on the boats ...The first picture is too busy(if you know what i mean )Welcome back btw!

Much obliged, good to be back

I think I do prefer the processed version but it's a real boost that people liek the first one too.

kjt

TelePaul wrote: »

Cool, why's that? I liked it when I took it but I think the motion blur and tobacco sky look great.

I think there's just too much changed to the second shot. If you spend 5/10mins on the original shot I think you could really improve the shot without changing anything dramatically. Even a tighter crop, cut out a bit of the left as there's nothing happening over there in the original

Fenster

I like the first purely because I don't like the processing style. It's gratuitous.

magicbastarder

i have had it up to HERE (i am indicating something very high) with fake vignetting.

AnimalRights

kjt wrote: »

To be honest I'd prefer the 1st shot

Same here, I know I am only new to forums/photography but to me tampering with a photo is "cheating" so to speak

/runs

bradnailer

bullock harbour:cool:
Spent a lot of summers down there, I like the first shot better. Not that there's anything wrong with editing a photo lab technicians in dark rooms have been doing it for countless years, It's just the effects are a little strange for that subject IMO:D

TelePaul

Have added a third with more conservative processing. I don't think there's anything wrong with photoshop - as was mentioned, it's all 'doable' in a lab.

Dades

I like the processing. The original needs something.

I would lose that border - give a much thicker, contrasting one. Also there's too much blur on the water for my taste. But the sky and the pier look great.

The whole thing might look better in a high contrast B&W/Sepia though?

TelePaul

Dades wrote: »

I like the processing. The original needs something.

I would lose that border - give a much thicker, contrasting one. Also there's too much blur on the water for my taste. But the sky and the pier look great.

The whole thing might look better in a high contrast B&W/Sepia though?

I think number three is probably the best of both worlds. I'll see what i can do with the border though.

Gorilla

I prefer the third one, the first is boring.

Calina

I have to confess I'm in total disagreement with the prevailing view here. I don't like either processed version, although if my back was to a wall I'd go with 3 being better.

If I were going to do anything with the original shot, I would adjust the curves. Because of the way the motion was added to the water, it looks completely unnatural, particularly when viewed alongside the pier and when compared to the water in the background. The first PS version in particular looked odd when you bore in mind the motion blur on the water, the weird de-focussing of the sky and the fact that the pier was pinsharp.

I'm not against photoshop processing techniques in principle, but I'm not sure this works at all.

just my two cents worth.

magicbastarder

there's a weird halo around the boats in both processed versions which loks horrendous.

TelePaul

magicbastarder wrote: »

there's a weird halo around the boats in both processed versions which loks horrendous.

IIs that just the motion blur or something more?

TelePaul

Gorilla wrote: »

I prefer the third one, the first is boring.

Yeah I think I agree.

Glowing

Cool, I think the second one looks like a holagram!

Chunky Monkey

I like the third one. The boats look like toy ones in the second one