Am I improving or not?

[Overread]

Well been playing around with hues control and want to know if I am heading in the right direction - I know its very easy to start overediting a shot and then end up making changes that are not needed or which end up detracting from the overall effect of a shot - so :

original:

edited:

The only difference is in the hues and a very slight increase inthe light to shadows in the latter (slight as in 2 units)

ps the change is subtle so you might want to save the image to your computer and flick between the two to see the difference

and if you want to you can answer the broad question in the title - though I only accept one answer for that

 

[eminart]

Are you sure you don't have them reversed? The one on top seems to have slightly more saturation (ever so slightly).

I think it's a great photo, and you could go a bit further before you've overdone it. As it is, I can't tell much difference.

 

[Overread]

the top might be more saturated overall, but its a uniform increase instead of selecting and changing the values of different colours which is in the second shot. Might be I was a bit more conservative the second time around with saturation.
And I agree the difference is not massive which I why I am after second opinions - online here I think its very hard to tell the difference - its easier if you flick between the two though if you save and then view them

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

The colours seem more natural on the fox in the first edit.

 

[RushNP774]

I agree with everyone, that's what I noticed. The first one looks a bit better to me, but you may have just posted them in reverse order. Great shot either way! Wish I had foxes outside my windows. All I have is ugly Cincinnati

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

I agree with everyone, that's what I noticed. The first one looks a bit better to me, but you may have just posted them in reverse order. Great shot either way! Wish I had foxes outside my windows. All I have is ugly Cincinnati

I think Overread actually cheats and goes to wild life reserve parks/zoos

 

[Josh66]

I think the foxes face looks better in the first one, and the grass looks better in the second one. It was very hard for me to see any difference at all... The foxes face looks slightly lighter in the second one.

 

[dEARlEADER]

the two images are so similar it doesn't really matter..... neither has more impact when viewed without a comparison...

 

[LaFoto]

There was this magenta cast on the branch behind the fox, and that disappeared, and I think it is for the better of the overall photo. The fact that by your framing poor fox lost its foot is the thing that worries me more, though. More than anything else!

 

[Overread]

I think Overread actually cheats and goes to wild life reserve parks/zoos

ssshhh your ruining my reputation
but yes - this if a Fox from the British Wildlife Centre - though someday I hope to get shots of true wild foxes!

There was this magenta cast on the branch behind the fox, and that disappeared, and I think it is for the better of the overall photo. The fact that by your framing poor fox lost its foot is the thing that worries me more, though. More than anything else!

Yah - I tend to have a habit of zooming in on the face and forgetting tails, legs, bodies and such! I guess I have to accept that my focal length is not long enough to let me get a face shot no matter how much I try to push it

 

[Do'Urden's Eyes]

That's ok man. I really dont consider it cheating. its probably more fun actually doing it the wild, but not more reputable. it all comes down to the pictures, and yours are lovely.