Creative Color Toning or "Correct"?

[DanOstergren]

What do you prefer? Do you like to get creative and think outside the box with the way you tone your photos, or do you prefer to make sure the colors are "correct", and true to what the eye sees?

Personally I like to have fun with the colors, and try to apply some harmonizing tones or contrasting tones. While I appreciate photos with perfect white balance and colors that are "correct", I would much rather get creative in most cases.

 

[AlanKlein]

I'll adjust colors to what my eyes likes aesthetically. Add a little saturation, contrast, etc. But I try not to go overboard. Once my eye says "too much", I back off. The brain will accept a large amount of color variances. Hence, the different palettes of film over the years. I prefer Velvia 50 when I'm shooting film. But even there, after I scan, I adjust the color to match my own preferences. I don;t try to match the film color by looking back at the slide.

On the other hand, certain things are more sensitive. For example, flesh tones. If you vary that too much, people will pick it up much easier because they're use to looking at skin. You don't want to make your subjects look ill. As an aside, I like your photos, Dan. I think you do great work with portraits and people photography.

 

[smoke665]

From a technical standpoint, Bayer filter sensitivity of the filter for each color can vary greatly between manufactures, and the spectral response of those filters on the sensors attempts to mimic the response of the three different types of cones in the human retina. However, our eyes have more overlap between the reds and greens then most digital cameras. So from a technical point, it could be argued that a digital image is not "true" as the eye sees it without editing. From a creative standpoint, I believe it's an artistic choice.

 

[snowbear]

It depends on my mood. I generally keep them close to the original scene or how I remember the original scene, but occasionally I'll stray and warm or cool a little.

 

[Overread]

Varies for me too - when doing macro, esp if its something like moths from a trap, then I'm trying to get the colour as accurate as possible without going overboard (because honestly I don't know near enough to really get it perfect). Meanwhile if its more general photography then I generally aim for what's pleasing to the eye whilst being realistic to the situation as I recall it. Eg I might warm a photo a little but I'm not going to make it look like sunset if I wasn't in that lighting to start with.

Of course those are only my general guidelines; I'm fully willing to step outside of them for the right situation, though would wager that my skills at "pushing" the extremes are likely lacking.

Like many things I'd prefer how to get it right and how to alter it well to them have the freedom to choose how I want to be creative rather than be limited to one form or the other by what I don't know.

 

[Braineack]

What do you prefer? Do you like to get creative and think outside the box with the way you tone your photos, or do you prefer to make sure the colors are "correct", and true to what the eye sees?

Personally I like to have fun with the colors, and try to apply some harmonizing tones or contrasting tones. While I appreciate photos with perfect white balance and colors that are "correct", I would much rather get creative in most cases.

I tend to stay true, but I have been toying a little. I've manipulated a few film presets that I keep applying left and right cause I really enjoy the look -- has a lot of changes in the hue, saturation, and luminace of colors, as well as the camera calibrations.

 

[JoeU]

Both, I think. I generally start with “correct” as a jumping-off point. But if I get a more pleasing version of the image with toning, so be it.

 

[Dave442]

I go for "correct" when a client says they want a specific color - specific like in the RGB values. For everything else I prefer to make "artistic" adjustments to what pops up on screen.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Dan whatever you're doing, works. It's clear to me that you create a specific tone, etc. I think there need to be reasons or a purpose to what's being done. It's obvious to me that it's done intentionally with your work Dan (which is consistently well done in a consistent style) but it doesn't stand out so much that it overpowers the photo. I feel like I shouldn't notice for example if color is really saturated, and if the first thing I think is that something's really overdone then it overpowered the subject or the photo itself.

I think there may be adjustments to photos, but then there's taking it further into being a photo illustration, an alternate process, etc. I think it needs to be clear, if you're toning a photo, tone it! lol If I use sepia Polaroid pack film, or monochromatic blue or magenta integral Polaroid film, I think it's obvious I meant it to be sepia or blue or magenta. If I'm doing cyanotypes, then well, they're going to be blue! To me it's obvious that it's meant to be monochromatic and not strictly a photograph that's realistic in color.

 

[DanOstergren]

It depends on my mood. I generally keep them close to the original scene or how I remember the original scene, but occasionally I'll stray and warm or cool a little.

Mood plays a big part in it for me as well, or simply aesthetic pleasure.

 

[DanOstergren]

What do you prefer? Do you like to get creative and think outside the box with the way you tone your photos, or do you prefer to make sure the colors are "correct", and true to what the eye sees?

Personally I like to have fun with the colors, and try to apply some harmonizing tones or contrasting tones. While I appreciate photos with perfect white balance and colors that are "correct", I would much rather get creative in most cases.

I tend to stay true, but I have been toying a little. I've manipulated a few film presets that I keep applying left and right cause I really enjoy the look -- has a lot of changes in the hue, saturation, and luminace of colors, as well as the camera calibrations.

What software are you using for photo editing? In photoshop, I find that playing with a Selective Color adjustment layer has opened up a lot of creative freedom for color manipulation.

 

[DanOstergren]

Dan whatever you're doing, works. It's clear to me that you create a specific tone, etc. I think there need to be reasons or a purpose to what's being done. It's obvious to me that it's done intentionally with your work Dan (which is consistently well done in a consistent style) but it doesn't stand out so much that it overpowers the photo. I feel like I shouldn't notice for example if color is really saturated, and if the first thing I think is that something's really overdone then it overpowered the subject or the photo itself.

I think there may be adjustments to photos, but then there's taking it further into being a photo illustration, an alternate process, etc. I think it needs to be clear, if you're toning a photo, tone it! lol If I use sepia Polaroid pack film, or monochromatic blue or magenta integral Polaroid film, I think it's obvious I meant it to be sepia or blue or magenta. If I'm doing cyanotypes, then well, they're going to be blue! To me it's obvious that it's meant to be monochromatic and not strictly a photograph that's realistic in color.

Thank you!

Even as a "professional" photographer (which is a terms I try using loosely), I choose to approach photography from the perspective of an artist, which to me means taking my edits in a direction that aligns with how I'm feeling and with what I find to be personally (and subjectively) beautiful. I try to receive criticism openly, but have also had to learn when to identify if something I did was done poorly, or when someone just doesn't "get it". To me, "correct" is a technical term that many see as not being subjective, but that in itself is a subjective opinion, and the "correct" ways of applying an art form is also subjective considering "art" is all about personal expression, right? Anyways, that's enough of me going off on this subject, lol. It's a topic that will be endlessly debated until the end of time.

 

[DanOstergren]

Also for those who are interested, I've been using an extension in photoshop recently called Infinite Color Panel. I still apply my own toning to many of my images and don't rely on this extension for my toning, but it has also helped me take new directions with my color toning that I never would have before, which I'm very happy with. I also feel like it's really helped me get a more polished and creative finished look than what I was reaching prior to using it.

 

[Braineack]

What software are you using for photo editing? In photoshop, I find that playing with a Selective Color adjustment layer has opened up a lot of creative freedom for color manipulation.

I still pretty much stick to LR whenever possible -- fooling with the camera calibrations in LR can have a similar effect, but way less targeted. I really try to stay out of PS as much as possible, simply because I don't have the time to do more than simply processing, but it really depends on what I'm working on.

 

[smoke665]

for those who are interested, I've been using an extension in photoshop recently called Infinite Color Panel.

In reading up on this, am I correct that this only works in cloud? Infinite Color bears a resemblance to features in Perfectly Clear, thier plug in bundles with Corel Paintshop. I think there's also a plug in for Ps.