Comparison help - original or "merged" ?

Discussion in 'Landscape & Cityscape' started by simonkit, May 19, 2007.

  1. simonkit

    simonkit TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    North Wales, UK
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Sorry if this is getting a bit boring but here's another I've just edited - 2nd shot is a "merge" of 2 Tiff files created from the original RAW. Which one works for you (if any) ?

    thanks

    simon

    ORIGINAL
    [​IMG]

    MERGED
    [​IMG]
     
  2. LaFoto

    LaFoto Just Corinna in real life Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    34,814
    Likes Received:
    814
    Location:
    Lower Saxony, Germany
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Well, I personally much prefer the original to the merged one, but that is because I normally like (my) photos a tad darker, more contrasty, and nicely saturated, and in your original one I see all the detail, also in the darker parts of the grass on the bank, that I need to see, and the sky is bluer in the water (the second is also a bit cropped, isn't it?), which I like.

    So if you were to ask only me, you'd hear: the original one.

    But others may think all differently, of course.
     
  3. abraxas

    abraxas No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    10,417
    Likes Received:
    9
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I think #1 also. By working with the same original RAW file nothing is gained by dividing it and putting it back together. Like having a glass of water, pouring it into two glasses and then back into one.

    I'm finding, in most cases, I prefer working with a single RAW over 3-5 exposure HDR.
     

Share This Page