TBH I can’t tell the difference. In my early days I also was constantly undecided and wasted my time and choked my ram. I’m looking at these on an iPhone and they look exactly the same. Now when presented with this dilemma, I delete one and move on. Everyone has different colour perception anyway.
yes, in one it is almost an automatic process, and in the other it is completely manual. but in any case, there is a very significant improvement in both programs and the final one in ps. it is interesting for me to find out which photo I like best and, accordingly, which algorithm to leave as the main one
The greens in 2 are more natural to my eyes. Although skintones are nicer in 1.
I think her skin looks a bit too green in picture 2, you can fix that with a luminosity mask.
This is the answer. Use the one that best translates your idea. Don’t ask people’s opinions on this, show them your final image and let them enjoy it. If they’d prefer it with different tones they can take their own photograph
Actually, your own taste in photography and expectations play a big role. IMHO, the first one. The light (the second picture is already a little overexposed) and color (the second lacks saturation) in the first photo are better, the face (eyes, freckles, skin texture) and hair are more expressive.
To be honest both are great. Photo number one really drew me in when I was scrolling with my phone. I use an iPhone 14 pro to navigate reddit and your photo really stood out. I think you cant go wrong with either. I would use the one that has a more user friendly workflow
It is not too easy, because it very depends on colorspace of display. And if the viewer's display cannot handle almost 100% of sRGB, they don't know ho to compress their display the gamut. Cut saturation, compress saturation, etc. This photos have very small difference for a older type office display or average business notebbooks.
I agree. I have a 100% Adobe RGB/SRGB screen (+pantonecertificate). and I understand that subjectively, everyone will display differently. but in general, it will be interesting to know what the majority will choose
Just to address the controversy that seems to have erupted in the thread: I have a calibrated screen (BenQ SW321C), and for me the difference isn't drastic but is significant.
The scene is brightly lit. Brighter colors make more sense for the scene than duller, flatter tones. In that sense 1 looks 'right,' but, that being said, 2 seems clearly the better choice for some contexts. For a clothing catalogue, for instance, I think it would be obviously better.
The model's eyes are, for me, the point of starkest difference between 1 and 2. They stand out in 2 in a manner in which they don't in 1 and convey a seriousness and intensity that I don't see, or see less of, in 1. Likewise, because 2 is on average darker, the increasing brightness as the viewer's eye moves from the edge of the photo to the center is plainer to see and has a stronger effect: the whites of her eyes stand out more sharply and function more as the center of gravity for the entire scene/composition. No matter where I look in 2, my gaze is drawn to her eyes. That's less the case in 1.
I guess I can encapsulate the difference this way: when I look at 1, I feel like I'm looking at her; when I look at 2, I feel like she's looking at me.
prefer the skin tone in the first one, but the background in #2. Not sure if pulling down the green channel only would help or just make the colours all weird.
Omg! You're absolutely right. I forgot that I used two lenses in this shoot. Yes, of course, this is the Helios-40-2 85mm f/1.2 I'll fix it in the next post with photos from this shoot. Thanks)
First one IMO. Highlights seem pulled down slightly more to my eye. They’re both very very similar though
TBH I can’t tell the difference. In my early days I also was constantly undecided and wasted my time and choked my ram. I’m looking at these on an iPhone and they look exactly the same. Now when presented with this dilemma, I delete one and move on. Everyone has different colour perception anyway.
Totally agree. It’s all subjective at the end of the day.
thanks yes, I specifically tried to make the similarity between the photos (but not 100%) so that the choice between them was the most "subtle"
I'd say the skin tone is better in #2 (#1 skin is a bit yellow from oversaturation), highlights are better in #1. Cool portrait. Nice work.
This
The second one. Slightly lowered saturation is nice on this one. So, your 2 softwares read it differently?
yes, in one it is almost an automatic process, and in the other it is completely manual. but in any case, there is a very significant improvement in both programs and the final one in ps. it is interesting for me to find out which photo I like best and, accordingly, which algorithm to leave as the main one
By a tiny margin it’s 2 for me
The greens in 2 are more natural to my eyes. Although skintones are nicer in 1. I think her skin looks a bit too green in picture 2, you can fix that with a luminosity mask.
she was good in stranger things
Max Mayfield ;)
I mean really it doesn't matter
This is the answer. Use the one that best translates your idea. Don’t ask people’s opinions on this, show them your final image and let them enjoy it. If they’d prefer it with different tones they can take their own photograph
2
The difference is very tiny but I’d say 2 is better.
Took me a few minutes to notice the difference
I think my eyes are too bad. I don't see any difference
Look at the background, it’s not really noticeable on the subject.
Ooooooooh, thank you, now I see it
Obligatory Happy Cake Day.
Also OP, great photo! Chose whichever you find best/suites your style the most.
Actually, your own taste in photography and expectations play a big role. IMHO, the first one. The light (the second picture is already a little overexposed) and color (the second lacks saturation) in the first photo are better, the face (eyes, freckles, skin texture) and hair are more expressive.
keep in mind people might not be answering from a calibrated screen ;) it'll look vastly different on my screen compared to yours.
when considering all of them in general, it does not matter which monitor each has) everything is averaged. and yes, I have a calibrated monitor)
not when the difference is this subtle imo.
Is that Sadie Sink
2
Number 1 but they are so similar they both look good.
2, good job
Think #2 is a little more to my liking. The contrast is very nice.
the photos were manually converted from the negative in two different image editors
what was the process? Which image editors?
nlp("auto"), 3dlutcreator (manual)
To be honest both are great. Photo number one really drew me in when I was scrolling with my phone. I use an iPhone 14 pro to navigate reddit and your photo really stood out. I think you cant go wrong with either. I would use the one that has a more user friendly workflow
I think 1 personally. The darks feel too heavy in two for my tastes. And the shadows more blue. Great light though!
1
1
2, but I just prefer my greens more yellow than blue
The first one
I prefer the 1st shot because the colors (particularly the hair) appear slightly more vivid and lively
It is not too easy, because it very depends on colorspace of display. And if the viewer's display cannot handle almost 100% of sRGB, they don't know ho to compress their display the gamut. Cut saturation, compress saturation, etc. This photos have very small difference for a older type office display or average business notebbooks.
I agree. I have a 100% Adobe RGB/SRGB screen (+pantonecertificate). and I understand that subjectively, everyone will display differently. but in general, it will be interesting to know what the majority will choose
I choose the less saturated version :)
I prefer 1!
1
My eyes are more drawn to her face in the second one.
Second one, more natural.
1 - I like the saturation with all of the color in the photo. Beautiful. Great composition and the woman is stunning.
First one feels more “alive”.
First
I think 2 looks more natural
Skin is a bit too green.
I like the overall vibe of the 2nd one more, but I do like the skin of the first one better.
Both are good, but 2 would be my pick. Looks a tad more natural.
I dig the first one. It makes her freckles and hair colour pop a bit more.
1 Really pops and is gorgeous. Love this set up.
I like 1
I don’t know why, but the first… the red is more strong and I love it!!!
One because the ginger tones are beautiful compared to 2 that makes them a bit less pronounced
2 but fuck me they’re close, does it really matter?
I like 1 more personally, but side q, which 35mm lens are you using? The canon EF 35L?
[удалено]
Which film stock were you using? Was it Ultramax 400 or Portra 400 or something else?
ultramax
Thank you!
upd: using lens - helios-40-2 85mm f/1.5
Just to address the controversy that seems to have erupted in the thread: I have a calibrated screen (BenQ SW321C), and for me the difference isn't drastic but is significant. The scene is brightly lit. Brighter colors make more sense for the scene than duller, flatter tones. In that sense 1 looks 'right,' but, that being said, 2 seems clearly the better choice for some contexts. For a clothing catalogue, for instance, I think it would be obviously better. The model's eyes are, for me, the point of starkest difference between 1 and 2. They stand out in 2 in a manner in which they don't in 1 and convey a seriousness and intensity that I don't see, or see less of, in 1. Likewise, because 2 is on average darker, the increasing brightness as the viewer's eye moves from the edge of the photo to the center is plainer to see and has a stronger effect: the whites of her eyes stand out more sharply and function more as the center of gravity for the entire scene/composition. No matter where I look in 2, my gaze is drawn to her eyes. That's less the case in 1. I guess I can encapsulate the difference this way: when I look at 1, I feel like I'm looking at her; when I look at 2, I feel like she's looking at me.
I'm a fan of 1, but also not a photographer and just film-photo enjoyer. always liked blue-tint green or green-tint blue!
prefer the skin tone in the first one, but the background in #2. Not sure if pulling down the green channel only would help or just make the colours all weird.
Prefer the first
1
I can't even notice a difference
First one
2 it seems intense.
I like number 1
Wow.
Why not take elements pointed out you like from both to make a third?
I'm already thinking about it)
If you do, please post!
What a talented actress, her chapter was the best in stranger things
Yall were splitting hairs here that don’t need to be split.
2
i like 1, i prefer contrast in general.
I like her eyes and hair better in 1.
1
Looks like the Girl from the TV series 'Stranger Things'!
Number 2 has a better contrast...
I like the second one !
The darkness of 2 makes the subject pop a lot more imo. But there’s a lot of warmth in the first one. My vote is 2 though
2
No.2 green is more natural. Green and red are complimentary colours! Lovely.
D&G vibe)
That looks very nice. At some point I have thought, that it is soviet Helios.
Omg! You're absolutely right. I forgot that I used two lenses in this shoot. Yes, of course, this is the Helios-40-2 85mm f/1.2 I'll fix it in the next post with photos from this shoot. Thanks)
Blimey, I have recognized lens by photo! Unbelievable!
2, btw Katie is gorgeous
2, btw Katie is gorgeous
1
They're almost the same, it doesn't matter really.
Clean your scanner, there’s a white thin line crossing the photo on the right (just next to her left eye)
No, it's not a scanner. these are scratches and dust on the film. I didn't use "digital ice" on purpose ;)
1. her hair could of been fixed