Rainbow over Liverpool

Mr_T said:
If you are a photographer why do you tend to hide what you've captured behind extreme post processing? I can honestly say I have no idea what the original would have looked like.
Click to expand...

To be fair you don't need to see what the original looked like. Pete isn't showing us the original, he's showing us his finished piece of work in the way he intended it to be viewed. If you don't like it then that's your perogative, just as it's Pete's perogative to process his work anyway he sees fit.

Personally I don't think the pp is that extreme and I've seen a lot worse (including from Pete!:p).
 
I'm not hiding anything. My camera isn't up to reproducing how I see things. Its not extreme. I could show you extreme :p I'm getting tired of having to do this every thread. To constantly defend what I do. Could we add it to the FAQ or something? "Is Pete a photographer? Yes and he uses that awful nasty HDR that your mummy says makes you go blind. Stay clean kids." :p
 
Nice composition but way too much PP for Ma Larkin, the clouds are really noisy and give the impression that the original image must have been quite dull and has been thrashed to within an inch of life to bring out some colour and detail.
 
Oh no. I can thrash it plenty more. The original was actually over exposed and noise, well thats nothing that can't be fixed. I don't see it as an issue.
 
petemc said:
I'm not hiding anything. My camera isn't up to reproducing how I see things. Its not extreme. I could show you extreme :p I'm getting tired of having to do this every thread. To constantly defend what I do. Could we add it to the FAQ or something? "Is Pete a photographer? Yes and he uses that awful nasty HDR that your mummy says makes you go blind. Stay clean kids." :p
Click to expand...

Put that in your sig Pete, for all the newbies. :rules:
 
I'm not interested in the original in the slightest. Only Pete knows if this is what he set out to achieve or not.

Would anybody who used clever darkroom trickery in the days of film be vilified in this??
 
Really nice shot Pete, a great moment captured, tiny bit heavy on the processing but still stunning - (...but the horizon is a smidgen out though (perhaps a micro smidgen!))
 
Mr_T said:
Can you show a thumbnail of the original? I'd like to see what this looked like out of camera. To me this is more of a demonstration of what can be done with extensive knowledge and skill in post processing but not really photography. I know what you like to use your own style of post processing, this is what you've become known for. I can't help thinking that there are some nice photographs underneath all of the pixel manipulation, they won't look quite the same because life isn't as contrasty and saturated but they will look realistic.
Click to expand...


Have to say I totally disagree with you.
Yes Pete knows how to "develop" a pic digitally.. but I guarantee you, more editing was done in the days of film, I certainly used to mess about with the processing more. But I was still a photographer, not just a darkroom specialist.
 
candlestick said:
I'm not interested in the original in the slightest. Only Pete knows if this is what he set out to achieve or not.

Would anybody who used clever darkroom trickery in the days of film be vilified in this??
Click to expand...

*1 (y)

And yes.. alot of burning in would get u similar results. I used to do it alot, aswell as changing skies in film
 
petemc said:
I'm getting tired of having to do this every thread. To constantly defend what I do.
Click to expand...

This is a forum where feedback is given, the comments here are supposed to critique your work. If you just want praise only post your work on flickr. You get extremely defensive to anyone that doesn't heap praise on you and very often won't actually answer the questions posed to you. If you are being questioned all the time for the work you do maybe you need to address the points brought up.
 
It's got Pete Carr written all over it. And to actually have that image, in your collection, must feel awesome. Right place, right time, right gear, bags of knowledge.

Gary.
 
+10 of a particular slider on one shot may have much more effect than +10 of the same slider on a different shot.

Surely you should know that Pete ;)


The point is, no on is forcing you to defend any decisions. They are simply offering their opinions. If a shot feels overprocessed to them, then that is their entitlement to think that.
Just because they didn't say the same about another, more processed shot doesn't make that opinion less valid. And nor does it make your opinion more valid.

Accept that some people will find some of your shots 'too far', with other shots just right. Some will like it, some will love it, some will hate what they see for whatever reason. Just thank them for taking the time to comment and move on.
You say you're tired of having to defend every time, but the only recurring factor in your threads is you ;) Not the photos, not HDR, not processing......

Just take a while to think about that my good man.
Just try and see that other peoples opinions are valid, however they choose to justify them.
 
Mr_T said:
This is a forum where feedback is given, the comments here are supposed to critique your work. If you just want praise only post your work on flickr. You get extremely defensive to anyone that doesn't heap praise on you and very often won't actually answer the questions posed to you. If you are being questioned all the time for the work you do maybe you need to address the points brought up.
Click to expand...

Yes I will defend my work. I'm not about to turn around and agree with all the people who think differently to me am I? Which questions have I missed? I try to answer them all.

Marcel said:
The point is, no on is forcing you to defend any decisions. They are simply offering their opinions. If a shot feels overprocessed to them, then that is their entitlement to think that.
Just because they didn't say the same about another, more processed shot doesn't make that opinion less valid. And nor does it make your opinion more valid.
Click to expand...


Its a discussion forum is it not? No-one ever said I have to agree with everything, or disagree. Maybe I do it badly but all I'm doing is trying to justify why I did what I did. Its not like I just threw the photo at Photoshop and accepted what it gave me. There are reasons and things for it.

Remember though that it takes 2 to tango. I'm not arguing with myself here.

Accept that some people will find some of your shots 'too far', with other shots just right. Some will like it, some will love it, some will hate what they see for whatever reason. Just thank them for taking the time to comment and move on.[/quote]

I'm not Matt Sayle :p

You say you're tired of having to defend every time, but the only recurring factor in your threads is you ;) Not the photos, not HDR, not processing......

Just take a while to think about that my good man.
Click to expand...

Why do you think I don't post much?

Just try and see that other peoples opinions are valid, however they choose to justify them.
Click to expand...

Surely that should also apply to me, and as such people shouldn't argue back? :p
 
No they should bloody well not, argumentative sods that they are ;)

What Im saying is, stop thinking you *have* to defend and disagree with every negative comment! And when you simply must...do it better :p
If you feel the need to explain why a shot looks like it does...try doing it in the opening post...that way when someone says they don't like it..you can accept it for what it is.....a purely subjective opinion. :)

Once you do that, you'll find yourself much happier and you'll be all smiles n stuff. I promise :D
 
petemc said:
I didn't say that. I didn't say I was waiting for someone to mention HDR so I could belittle them. I said I was waiting for someone to mention HDR.
Click to expand...

:thinking: So what did you think the comma was for in my post? There's a world of difference in meaning between having it there and not having there and you chose to misqoute me by leaving it out :nono:.

Besides which, I wasn't the first person to mention HDR, but the other poster probably offered more praise than I did, so their comments went unchallenged.

petemc said:
I
I'm known for it and as such any processed image I post someone will bring it up. It always happens. I've posted non HDR photos that people moan about the HDR in or say that they like the HDR in it. So yes, I was waiting for someone to bring it up. You must have also missed the :p at the end. Sort of hints at tongue in cheek :p

But then what does it matter? You said you like HDR but then didn't like the image, which is what I focused on. HDR, well tonemapping, and the "It looks like a painting" response go hand in hand. However on this occasion I only used a tiny bit of HDR to add to the image. I didn't want the cliched HDR painterly look. The fact that you like HDR just isn't hugely relevant. So you like HDR. So? Do you go around saying you like colour too? :p
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that I didn't take the necessary time to research your entire photographic back catalogue and develop a better knowledge of your personal PPing preferences and lack of respect for other people's opinions, before I made my post :|.

I put a lot of effort into offering polite, constructive critcism in my original post, exactly as the forum rules indicate I should. The second time, I was more blunt.

This time, I'm simply posting to say that I agree with Marcel's comments and no that amount of smilies make up for your kind of intolerance and rudeness.
 
Contemplate . . . If John Lennon and P Mc. had put their songs on forums like this, their songwriting would eventually have been dissected into perfectly formed pop.
It wasn't . . . and it became the yardstick for excellence. Just believe.
FWIW -I looooooooove it! :)
 
I love the photo too, I suppose we cant all be the same and ones mans meat is another mans poison!
 
Outstanding Pete...(y)

Hairs on the back of the neck and all that :notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

Cheers...kevin
 
There are parts that I do like about this, and parts that I don't.
For me the clouds at the top look a little over PP'd and look somehow out of place in the shot. Almost like they would be from another photo altogether. But.. maybe that's just me.

Everything below that is something that I can enjoy, even if I generally do not like HDR that is this 'strong'.
 
In my opinion I think it is terrible, the processing on the sky has ruined a good shot. Not for me this one. :thumbsdown:
 
Yay, Pete's back. The forum has been a bit dull recently and too polite ;)

Quick subjective (being the operative word) opinion on this shot - I normally really like your stuff, but think this one is too overcooked and looks just a tad too mental. Then again if that's what you were going for, then you've succeeded, so fair play.
 
GooGaBu said:
Everything below that is something that I can enjoy, even if I generally do not like HDR that is this 'strong'.
Click to expand...

If I tell you that most of the processing was done in Lightroom would you like it more? :p Love or hate HDR, I don't care because Lightroom is to blame for most of this :p
 
petemc said:
If I tell you that most of the processing was done in Lightroom would you like it more? :p Love or hate HDR, I don't care because Lightroom is to blame for most of this :p
Click to expand...

Mmm, nope - that still didn't change my mind :bonk:
 
mxfun said:
Post the original shot ,without the processing
Click to expand...

That would be nice to see.. it is always interesting to see where the photographer started from. Especially in these types of images.
ALthough, I do also understand that sometimes the togs rather not show the original, and respect that one.
 
you know, if you said 'please' he might even consider it.

Actually, scrap that, he wouldn't anyway, but at least show some manners :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top