Which Looks Better?

Joined
9 September 2007
Messages
5,486
Location
Chicago Burbs
Now that the weather is finally getting better, I'm going out more and shooting. As most BEGINNER/amateur photographers notice, shots lose some image quality (IQ) post-upload to the web. I've been doing some experimenting to improve my shots (post production) and preserve IQ. Take a look at these shots and let me know what you think looks better. Picture 1 or 2, in respective set A and B.

Please comment on the image quality, not if you think the shot sux, etc. :D


Set A:

Picture 1:

1.jpg


Picture 2:

1-ts.jpg


Set B:

Picture 1
2.jpg



Picture 2:
2-ts.jpg
 
both picture compositions are good. i, personally would have had less 'ground' in the second shot, but that is just me.

i'm on an ibm thinkpad with a 15.4" widescreen displaying 1680x1050 at maximum brightness.

the difference between the first set is very little. contrast seems a little bit higher on the second picture, but other than that, i cannot see much difference.

for the second set, i can see a slight color saturation increase for the second picture, but nothing besides that.

what are you shooting with?

edit:

the exif data says:
canon 40d with what i would assume is the 50mm f/1.8
post processed with photoshop 7.0

correct?
 
Last edited:
The main problem is, as you mentioned, the variations in everybody's monitor setup. In addition, different browsers and different operating systems will interpret the color profile information differently. Those factors on top of saving the image into a lossy format like JPEG will lead to a huge amount of possible variation between what different people see.

I opened these in PS in order to get the proper color interpretation and I think pic 2 definitely looks nicer. I think in general, car photos look better when there is more saturation and contrast... It brings out the reflective properties better.
 
notable difference...

Pic #2 in both sets has the Imola Orange Pearl popping more, quite easily discernible. . .

Pic #1 in both sets is still HQ, but relatively duller (I.O.P. color is flatter or more neutral). . .

At the mo', using an ol' skool G70 IBM CRT in a bright room flush w/ natural sunlight. . .
 
Last edited:
Agree 100%... as soon as i saw the photos i thought of exactly that... then i read Erick's post further down :wink:

i like the picture #2 in from both sets.


my reason because it brings out more color.
imola orange pearl is an amazing color and it's really hard to bring those colors to life onto an LCD screen.

good job.
 
I think all the pics look good. It's hard to show the true Imola color in a pic. Nothing beats seeing it in person on a bright sunny day. :cool:
 
Picture 1:

1.jpg

nsx_imola.jpg


I took your original number ONE picture and I did my "adjustment", I do this almost everyday @ work with customer's stuff, your original picture is very good, i didn't Balance stuff too much, as others say, the orange needed a bit more "IMOLA" in there ... but then I think I abused a bit on the blacks, but each person has it's own interpretation, i like the contrasts normally on pictures ....

LOVE YOUR NSX regardless! LOL
OScar
 
A: #1

B: #2


The car almost looks greenish in A2, and the little bit of contrast helps in B2
 
I'm only a beginner photographer too so I really can't help you on all the technical gibberish. However, I took an art photography class that really helped train my eye with composition and aesthetics. From a purely aesthetics point of view, there are elements of each set that are good and bad for different reasons. If you can combine the two, you'll have a great shot.

The saturation, hues and tones in the second set B are better than set A. The color stands out a little better and looks to be more indicative of the actual color. Also there is a little more depth to it. Set B picture 1 nails it the best.

Also with set B the focus is better than set A. In set A, it is just a static picture and everything is in perfect focus. In set B, the car is in focus but as you move away from the car, you lose some focus. Comparing the pavement in the two pictures really highlights this. The dynamic focus of the set B really add some nice flair and touch to the shot.

However, the problem with the set B photos is that the white balance of the overall picture is imbalanced. Since you are parked near a bright bollard and have the headlights on, there is an excessive amount of "light" on the left side of the picture. Just think if you were actually in the picture, there would be too much light hitting the left side of your eye, and you'd want to squint or block your eye. The same effect can happen in your picture and the effect is it basically washes out the front of your car. I don't really look at it because I'm distracted by all the "light" (white) on that side of the picture. I would suggest turning the headlights off or relocating the lighting bollards elsewhere. But then again, when doing night shots, I prefer a single source of light anyway, but that's just personal preference. Set A doesn't have this problem because the lighting appears to be universal.

The other advantage Set A has is that the car is not centrally located in the picture. Do you know the rule of thirds, where you divide the picture up into the thirds both side to side and up and down. If you want an eye catching shot, shoot in one of the third off-center sections rather than square in the middle. Do you see how in set A the car is in the lower third, while in set B the car is in the middle? Shifting the car off-center improves the overall artistic qualities of the shoot, if that is what you are going for.

I think if you combine the advantages of both sets, you'll have a really spectacular shot. Another idea you may want to add/consider is to add a bit of flair to the shot as well. Catch it at a high or low angle. Turn the wheels full lock in one direction. Etc. Etc. However, overall, fantastic pictures! Keep up the great work and can't wait to see the next set of pictures you take.
 
Back
Top