I just got a new laptop, and I really like the large, bright LCD screan that is has. Last night, I processed a photo, that I wanted to post in critique. I made my changes on the laptop and got everything just how I wanted it. I saved it, burned it to a CD, the reopened it on my desktop PC, so I could post it, as my laptop is not set up for the net yet. The photo seemed really flat to me, so I had to do tweek it a bit more before I posted it.

Here are the two photos: 1 is straight from the laptop, 2 is after I tweeked it on my desk top before I posted it. Which one looks better to you? Neither one of my monitors have been calibrated... so could someone with a calibrated monitor and everyone else, let me know how they look to you, color wise?

Ahhh,

I'm split. I love the soft colors of the first one, but the vividness of the second is nice. I put number two, it's just more definate.

I just got a new laptop, and I really like the large, bright LCD screan that is has. Last night, I processed a photo, that I wanted to post in critique. I made my changes on the laptop and got everything just how I wanted it. I saved it, burned it to a CD, the reopened it on my desktop PC, so I could post it, as my laptop is not set up for the net yet. The photo seemed really flat to me, so I had to do tweek it a bit more before I posted it.

Here are the two photos: 1 is straight from the laptop, 2 is after I tweeked it on my desk top before I posted it. Which one looks better to you? Neither one of my monitors have been calibrated... so could someone with a calibrated monitor and everyone else, let me know how they look to you, color wise?

Was number 2 sharpened? It looks like it was to me and it gives this picture more visual impact than the first one. About the colors, for what it worths, (my monitor is calibrated) I'd say that I prefer the colors of the first picture. They are
a bit too flat but more natural to me. On the second picture, the colors have a great initial impact but look a bit overdone.

Overall, I'd pick number two but my choice is motivated by the mix of color and sharpness in it. If I was relying on colors all alone I'd rather choose number one.

Could you tell us all the post processing that went into these?

regards

Seb

I'm looking at these on my calibrated monitor and here's what I think:

#1: The colors are just a little too saturated (greens and reds) for my taste. Close, but a little much. Just a tiny bit more contrast might help too.

#2: Too much contrast, and it looks a little oversharpened too.

It's not a bad shot, it's just the lighting that makes it a little flat. There is some texture in the sky so the light wasn't completely flat. I approach something like this differently, I guess - I would probably shoot tighter to eliminate the sky. It's more of a matter of working with the light conditions that you have - work on closeups and look at stuff on the ground. So, I voted for #1...:)

Thanks everyone for taking the time to look and post!

To be honest with you, I don't remember exactly what I did to either of them... I believe I did do a little extra sharpening on #2 in order to get it to look like #1 did on my laptop. I think I did a slight levels adjustment on #2 as well...

Now that I'm on my other computer with an uncalibrated monitor, the second shot looks better. The first is too low in contrast but the colors look good.

I'd only trust the calibrated monitor, of course - but it's interesting how much of a difference it makes.

I have read that LCD monitors aren't the greatest quality for photographers, so I'm wondering if it would be worth it to calibrate my laptop monitor... any ideas?

Was number 2 sharpened? It looks like it was to me and it gives this picture more visual impact than the first one. About the colors, for what it worths, (my monitor is calibrated) I'd say that I prefer the colors of the first picture. They are
a bit too flat but more natural to me. On the second picture, the colors have a great initial impact but look a bit overdone.

Overall, I'd pick number two but my choice is motivated by the mix of color and sharpness in it. If I was relying on colors all alone I'd rather choose number one.

Could you tell us all the post processing that went into these?

regards

Seb

Mea Culpa,

I agree with what Another View said,

Red and green are a little too much in the first one and the second one is oversharpened (mostly noticeable on the post were the textures "break" but also noticeable in others areas of the scenes).

I don't know why I didn't saw this at first....

MJS, there are superb lcd monitors (Apple, Eizo, some Viewsonic's...) and then there are lesser ones. I think that the comments about lcd's being inferiors are old perceptions that doesn't die. LCD's monitor were so-so at best not so long ago (I still have a 1998 IBM thinkpad laying arround and the monitor is atrocious in direct comparison with my current 2002 Apple display). That being said, the quality significantly improved over the past few years. It can't hurt to calibrate your laptop display. Beside, if you buy a spyder and it's software it isn't lost. You can always use the gears to calibrate any monitor you might buy in the future.

Seb

Michael, calibrate the laptop and then post the differances.
#1 is a tad flat.
#2 is 2 tads too rich & sharp.
My vote is for # 1.
Thanks for posting this thread,
Mark.

Calibrated or not, answering the question "which looks better" is still subject to opinion.

Which do I think looks better? The first one.

Calibrated or not, answering the question "which looks better" is still subject to opinion.

Which do I think looks better? The first one.


That is a very good point Trevor, but I figured I would get some input and opinions anyway. I think the best way for me to choose would be to process one on each computer, and have them both printed and judge for myself. There are so many variables when it comes to this type of thing that it can seem very overwhelming to get control and nail things down.

Thanks for the comment!