Some of my work

[kkealy92]

Hey guys I am very new at this been only shooting for about a week now and been messing around with editing, I would love to improve, let me know what you think.

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

 

[DanFinePhotography]

These are all pretty good, however in my opinion the look a little over processed. The colors in #3 are AWESOME

 

[inspire-me]

I love #3 also. The colors really make the light coming through the break in the clouds stand out. Absolutely breath-taking!

 

[Ryan L]

Really not digging any of them, I do like the composition of #6, but it could be pulled off with a level horizon and I think it would be better (I do not like the selective color though).

 

[peanut170]

looks like you cut the duck out and pasted him on a different pic.

 

[misstwinklytoes]

They look noisy to me? And very over saturated. Could just be me though.

 

[Blake.Oney]

They are over saturated, but I don't think they're noisy. The first 2 look like it I think because the hue changes aren't as smooth because of the saturation. I don't think the duck was cut and pasted, but I do think the color selection is kind of sloppy on it. 2 and 6 are the best. I would re edit 2 and bring down the saturation.

 

[Corvphotography]

trying too hard. less is more.

 

[kkealy92]

Ok I re edited 2 and here it is. I think they my be all a bit noisy because the camera I got dose not do well in low light conditions, not sure if that is it though. Also on the selective color I like those photos because I think it gives a message that the world is very plan hard but some things just bring out the color in life. It may sound stupid but it is what I think and I completely understand why some people dont like it. Thanks for all the feed back guys it lets me know how to improve. P.s to explian number three with why the ground is grey and the sky is bright, I am a big Believer and god and I was trying to capture as if heaven was shining as the life left the earth and it was going to heaven.

 

[Taylor510ce]

You have been shooting for about a week. Spend a little more time on that and a little less time on the Post Processing. They are all edited very badly. I do not say this to be mean, but its true. Plus, they aren't great to begin with. The first one could have been good if the boring barrels didn't ruin your shot. If you had just shown off the lake and the cool looking sky ( and had a better exposure ) it could have worked without processing it more like #2 and #3. The main problem I notice is your composition. Do some studying on that topic. Do not let what I say discourage you, let it inspire you to learn more. We all started where you are right now.

With that said, your main question was on the topic of the post processing, and like I said, its overdone. Less is more. Learn the basics like contrast, color/levels, sharpening. Master the basics before attempting to go into heavy manipulation because frankly those basic things are what will ruin a pic most easily and most often in my opinion. So without them being done well, everything else you do to the pic falls apart.

 

[LaFoto]

Welcome to ThePhotoForum, welcome to your new pasttime!

I'm with Taylor here: before you delve too deeply into post processing (which is part of digital photography, no doubt, but only "in the end"), you should give much more attention to the more fundamental things in photography, those that have applied to "capturing things in an image" for almost all times: composition. And furthermore (more photography-related) exposure. Read about those fundamentals, put what you have learned into practise, and only THEN try to enhance things in post.

These look like you try to start at the end of things. And - like about all newcomers to post processing techniques - you don't really see as yet that subtlety is key.

But that's what we are here for, that's why you can show your photos and talk about them with us.

 

[kkealy92]

Ok so I looked through composition a bit still looking into it more and I think that number 6 was the closes I got to following all the rules, am I right or is there another one that is better? because it seems like 6 is following the thirds rule and has balancing elements, being the dock. Am I kinda on the right track?

 

[LaFoto]

Well, yes, but look at the lady's feet. Where are they? Look at the horizon! Your lake is going to run out and all the water is getting onto my desk here!

Crooked angles can be ok in some cases, but when there's a water surface involved it is unwise to go for them, as it'll always look like a mistake.

 

[KenC]

#1 is a very nice image which says it all - adding color doesn't really add anything, and possibly detracts.

 

[Taylor510ce]

6 is better, but there are many things that can be used to improve a shot or that can ruin a shot. The rule of thirds is a good place to start, but is not alway required. There are other things that play a part as well. The angled dock creates a leading line that tends to pull your eye through the picture and away from your subject.

Also, you are clipping things on the edge of the frame like the girls ankles and feet and the shoes on the dock. I mean these might not be RULES but I think it would have been better to show her feet or atleast where they enter the water ( maybe this is just personal taste ) Also, the shoes I think should either be in the frame as a storytelling element,or out of the frame so as not to be a cluttered clumb at the corner of the frame that doesn't do anything for the shot.