A Rose for the Wife

[Trblmkr]

We have these beautiful red roses in our front yard, but she loves purple.



Denise Girardia by Dan_Girard, on Flickr

 

[cgipson1]

NIce rose, but the selective color makes my eyes hurt.

 

[Trblmkr]

NIce rose, but the selective color makes my eyes hurt.

Well then don't look at it

 

[cgipson1]

NIce rose, but the selective color makes my eyes hurt.

Well then don't look at it

Don't worry... I won't!

 

[tirediron]

I think the point Charlie is trying to make is that selective colour is one of those techniques that's often not used to best advantage. Because it's actually quite easy to do, and can produce relatively dramatic results many people try it. The intent of selective colour is to draw the eye to one specific aspect of a scene, for instance in a commercial, the bulk of the scene might be monochrome, but the featured product, say a box of cereal is in full colour. This grabs the viewer's attention and makes it very clear what he/she should be looking at.

With your rose image, my suggestion would be revert the background foliage to colour again but to desaturate it slightly so that the bloom clearly stands out, but the image as a whole doesn't look so unnatural.

 

[Ballistics]

It's nice, but on 2 parts of the rose, it looks like you slipped a bit and colored outside of the rose.

 

[cptkid]

It's nice, but on 2 parts of the rose, it looks like you slipped a bit and colored outside of the rose.

This, and also the leaves just below are still a bit green.

As said above, selective colour very rarely works.

 

[Ballistics]

It works here though, imo. Just needs to be cleaned up. It very rarely works, because people with 2 days of photography experience are usually the ones that use selective color.
I've seen many selective colors that were done really well. But, those who dislike selective color, are also usually against overcooked HDRs, which I happen to really enjoy.
To each their own.

I will say though, if you are against a facet of photography in the first place, critiquing it is kind of a double edged sword.

 

[Trblmkr]

I think the point Charlie is trying to make is that selective colour is one of those techniques that's often not used to best advantage. Because it's actually quite easy to do, and can produce relatively dramatic results many people try it. The intent of selective colour is to draw the eye to one specific aspect of a scene, for instance in a commercial, the bulk of the scene might be monochrome, but the featured product, say a box of cereal is in full colour. This grabs the viewer's attention and makes it very clear what he/she should be looking at.

With your rose image, my suggestion would be revert the background foliage to colour again but to desaturate it slightly so that the bloom clearly stands out, but the image as a whole doesn't look so unnatural.

I've got plenty of time to play with it. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[Trblmkr]

It's nice, but on 2 parts of the rose, it looks like you slipped a bit and colored outside of the rose.

Yup.. good catch Sir

 

[cenote]

It's nice, but on 2 parts of the rose, it looks like you slipped a bit and colored outside of the rose.

I'd be darn if I see it, thought it was pretty cool post color myself.

 

[Trblmkr]

Okay..


Fixed the two parts where I went over - Thanks for Ballistics for pointing it out.

"background foliage to colour again but to desaturate it slightly so that the bloom clearly stands out" - Suggestion from Tirediron

I also re-cropped it to make it more of the rose, and less of the foliage.