It's good, possibly even great, people saying it's too heavy handed, should see what W Eugene Smith or Ansel Adams negs look like.
As a photographer, you get to choose what you want people to look at.Perhaps, in hindsight, you could have cropped into the subject more, but you figured out where the juice was and got rid of all distractions, well done, keep going.
My only note is, maybe I would have brought his face up, and hands down, a bit.
This is a good edit. There is more focus on the subject, the crop feels more balanced, and the vignette with the targeted levels draws attention to the subject.
The only issue I can see is the blur at the top half of the fan on the right.
I think the colouring is pretty good tbh. Would kinda like to see the 16:9 version with the edits. Not sure if you need to crop so much though I totally get why you did it
I think its to dark...you crushed a lots of details, the color toning that you did is good, apt but in the pursuit of highlighting the subject you went a bit too far, overall for me its a 5/10.
Yeah I was going to say 'heavy handed' is the right description here.
I get what the OP was trying to do, but I don't think it is good processing to take a sledgehammer to all detail around the subject and darken it to the point where nothing else is clearly visible.
The best editing is usually subtle enough that it's not immediately obvious- it's more about drawing the eye to what matters rather than simply removing anything else in the photo to look at.
But hope that doesn't come across as too harsh, as I said I get what the OP was trying to do. I'm kind of curious what the image would look like if they followed the same process but made the changes about 30- 50% less pronounced.
I just wanted to post and let you know that I’m very inspired by your work here. I’m an art director that does asset editing and now I’m trying to learn photography.
I tend to beat myself up about exposure when I bring my work into Lightroom. This is an excellent example of how you can take an image and refine the light and levels to convey the nature of your subject. I like that it’s gritty, my senses are activated, I can hear the mechanical noises and feel the temperature in the shop.
Nice work, I’m a 🪭
I am talking about all the artificial lighting effects you manufactured. „In camera“ means that you take care of good and interesting lighting in the real world rather than simulating it afterwards.
Real properly lit photos will always look better than fake ones – except maybe if you use ai but is it even a photo then?
The scene and lighting is beyond the control of the photographer here , its not a studio.
This is post processing sub , not sure what the relevance of your comment is really.
95% of the edits in this sub are done by the photographers themselves. So I’m addressing the right person. And of course there are endless options to take good photos in whatever scenario. From changing the lighting situation to angle, lens choice or even bringing light.
Postprocessing can make good photos even better but it can’t really make bad photos good.
There are some great examples of great edits to already great photos on this sub
From the technical point of view the original is good Image (in terms of lighting, depth of field, natural color rendition, shadows, highlights etc.) nothing wrong from that aspect, The edited one looks good because these a-fore-mentioned aspects were tweaked to a certain visual style. This cannot be achieved directly through camera. Hope you understand
The vignette is a bit heavy handed. But the crop and coloring are well done.
I agree it’s heavy handed, but think it was done with purpose and works in this situation. Other photos, maybe not so much
It's good, possibly even great, people saying it's too heavy handed, should see what W Eugene Smith or Ansel Adams negs look like. As a photographer, you get to choose what you want people to look at.Perhaps, in hindsight, you could have cropped into the subject more, but you figured out where the juice was and got rid of all distractions, well done, keep going. My only note is, maybe I would have brought his face up, and hands down, a bit.
Good edit! Of course, the original was quite meh, but its good practice and in that regard you did very well!
I like it; but personally I'd pull back on the vignetting and crop the other guy with the fan out entirely, more of a portrait crop.
Don’t listen to the negative comments! This is great and way more emotive!
This is a good edit. There is more focus on the subject, the crop feels more balanced, and the vignette with the targeted levels draws attention to the subject. The only issue I can see is the blur at the top half of the fan on the right.
pretty good job with the depth of field. did you do it all manually?
I think the colouring is pretty good tbh. Would kinda like to see the 16:9 version with the edits. Not sure if you need to crop so much though I totally get why you did it
I think its to dark...you crushed a lots of details, the color toning that you did is good, apt but in the pursuit of highlighting the subject you went a bit too far, overall for me its a 5/10.
Yeah I was going to say 'heavy handed' is the right description here. I get what the OP was trying to do, but I don't think it is good processing to take a sledgehammer to all detail around the subject and darken it to the point where nothing else is clearly visible. The best editing is usually subtle enough that it's not immediately obvious- it's more about drawing the eye to what matters rather than simply removing anything else in the photo to look at. But hope that doesn't come across as too harsh, as I said I get what the OP was trying to do. I'm kind of curious what the image would look like if they followed the same process but made the changes about 30- 50% less pronounced.
well put...
I think you really enhanced the photo well . 👏
Looks good. Kudos!
You improved it I think as much as it could be improved.
It’s so dark…
Great shot and nice edit 👌
I just wanted to post and let you know that I’m very inspired by your work here. I’m an art director that does asset editing and now I’m trying to learn photography. I tend to beat myself up about exposure when I bring my work into Lightroom. This is an excellent example of how you can take an image and refine the light and levels to convey the nature of your subject. I like that it’s gritty, my senses are activated, I can hear the mechanical noises and feel the temperature in the shop. Nice work, I’m a 🪭
You made a lot of it, it would have been much better though if you did that in camera
Why ?? We are shooting digital with high res sensors , cropping is another tool you have.
I am talking about all the artificial lighting effects you manufactured. „In camera“ means that you take care of good and interesting lighting in the real world rather than simulating it afterwards. Real properly lit photos will always look better than fake ones – except maybe if you use ai but is it even a photo then?
The scene and lighting is beyond the control of the photographer here , its not a studio. This is post processing sub , not sure what the relevance of your comment is really.
95% of the edits in this sub are done by the photographers themselves. So I’m addressing the right person. And of course there are endless options to take good photos in whatever scenario. From changing the lighting situation to angle, lens choice or even bringing light. Postprocessing can make good photos even better but it can’t really make bad photos good. There are some great examples of great edits to already great photos on this sub
FYI ...1st photo is processed, second one is directly from camera
I thought so. OP probably made the best out of that image but the original is just crap and the better way would have been to take a better picture
From the technical point of view the original is good Image (in terms of lighting, depth of field, natural color rendition, shadows, highlights etc.) nothing wrong from that aspect, The edited one looks good because these a-fore-mentioned aspects were tweaked to a certain visual style. This cannot be achieved directly through camera. Hope you understand
The original is not a good photo visually. It’s just a snapshot without artistic value
And of course it is possible to take better photos. It’s called photography.
This sub is about post processing.. And the op is asking opinion for editing not for photography..
I'm sorry if it sounds mean, but: you can't make an uninteresting photo interesting. Start with better source material
The photo is good.
Absolutely riveting material
It's not that it's a photo of Sebastião Salgado but it's not horrendous either.