Clevedon - which to print?

[Digifrog]

Thoughts peeps pls.

 

[gramps]

1st for me Scott, it retains more detail and is pleasingly a bright 'pastel', the 2nd looks a bit drab but I guess a lot could depend on how/where it will be used.

 

[Neil B]

Somewhere in the middle would be my preference

 

[huffy]

I would say out of the two No1 but really agree with Neil.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

No2 will be almost black (2 stops underexposed). Even the first will have very dark and dominating rocks on the bottom. Personally, I think you have better ones in your collection to put on the wall.

 

[greenoak]

The problem I have with the images , is the foreground rocks is to much of the photo 50% of the image is far to much for foreground. is it a rock photo a pie or sky image . Plus theres just not enough interest in the sky

 

[Brian G]

Take a small slice off the top and reduce the overall brightness of the first one a little, and then reduce the brightness and increase the saturation of the sky a bit more (use the graduated filter in Lightroom).
Agreed that the foreground rocks are a bit dominant, but I think you need to retain detail in them, which is being lost in the second one.

No2 will be almost black (2 stops underexposed). Even the first will have very dark and dominating rocks on the bottom. Personally, I think you have better ones in your collection to put on the wall.

Don't really understand that.
The second one would look rather dark, but a print should exactly match what you see on your screen.
If it doesn't then you are doing something wrong.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Don't really understand that.
The second one would look rather dark, but a print should exactly match what you see on your screen.
If it doesn't then you are doing something wrong.

It will not be *exactly* as you see on the screen, because screen is backlit and paper is not, and there are subtle differences between papers and colour gamut reproduction. Aside from that - what is the point printing something really dark unless it is for something as dark as a wine cellar to match the darkness? It will look dreadful in an airy room or an office, and not much better elsewhere.

 

[barratt1988]

The problem I have with the images , is the foreground rocks is to much of the photo 50% of the image is far to much for foreground. is it a rock photo a pie or sky image . Plus theres just not enough interest in the sky

I have to disagee the forground for me sits right in the image. Thats where most of the detail is and it reduces and 'dead space'

Personally I think a re-edut would made it look great. Maybe lighten the ricks a tad and use an nd on the sky.

Out of curiosity what kit and setting where used?

 

[Brian G]

It will not be *exactly* as you see on the screen, because screen is backlit and paper is not, and there are subtle differences between papers and colour gamut reproduction. Aside from that - what is the point printing something really dark unless it is for something as dark as a wine cellar to match the darkness? It will look dreadful in an airy room or an office, and not much better elsewhere.

I agree that the second example is too dark and lacks shadow detail, but your comment was that it would be "almost black" as a print.

Since it's not "almost black" as a screen image, there is no reason why a print should look any different.
I don't have any problems creating a print that matches my screen display.
The only way a print will be "2 stops underexposed" is if it were printed that way.
If it looks poor on the screen, it will look equally poor as a print, but it should not look significantly different.

 

[Stu Meech]

It'd be the first for me if I was choosing.

 

[Digifrog]

The problem I have with the images , is the foreground rocks is to much of the photo 50% of the image is far to much for foreground. is it a rock photo a pie or sky image . Plus theres just not enough interest in the sky

Sorry, I wanted to know out of the two which was preferred. I didn't put this up for general critique.

To everyone else, thank you. From the responses, I think I have gathered that the lighter version is preferred. It's not a competition winner I knows but I don't care about that. I take pictures for myself.

For those that mentioned "somewhere in between", that's an interesting thought and one I might consider if I was to re-edit.

Tomas, I don't know what you mean there buddy. Images on my screen appear exactly as they do when I print them. Granted the 2nd is "low key" and detail is lost in some areas but the first will have no issues whatsoever.