* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #868 / Revived #088 on 2024 12 04 *

I love spider webs and started to post one myself this week. The water drops on this web are quite nice. Having it in front of a red background was especially tempting but the white OOF background along the inner edge of the red is a little distracting. Have you tried converting this one to monochrome? I've sometimes had pleasing results when trying to fight off s distraction behind the web.

All well and good if it's how you want the colors to look. But let's don't assume that anyone who doesn't care for your color choices has a faulty monitor. This image, like others of yours whose color treatment some have found disconcerting, looks exactly the same on multiple monitors at my house - my calibrated desktop monitor, my husband's laptop monitor, two iPad screens and a phone. And- when I got stuck in the Apple store for an hour waiting for my new iPad to be activated few days ago, I logged into the forum and out of curiosity looked at it on a bank of new Apple monitors, and it looked the same on them too. It is not a calibration issue. It is simply your preference, and that is fine. Your images, your choice. We all have our creative freedom.

Nice adjustment.

Purples, magentas, and pinks are very common in sunsets where I live, and in other North American locations I've visited from Canada to Mexico. I've also seen these colors in sunsets in Iceland and parts of Europe. I haven't traveled in the southern hemisphere, the East, or the poles, so l don't have any first hand information about them.

I have not made any selective saturation modification to this image.
Certainly not one specific colour or whatnot.
It's a long long time ago, but I probably just did a few of my usual (semi-automated) tweaks for a bit more pop.

In cloudy conditions, sunsets are often pink/purplish, possibly because the sun reflects against the clouds (but I am not a scientist).

Thank you for your opinion ArvoJ.

Obviously I see and interpret images differently to you.

I have no issue with that.

Thank you 🙂

No.

I wouldn’t choose to do that. In this case, there’s nothing in that area of the image to reveal the distortion created. But that’s just accidental.

Rich

You can add/remove pretty much whatever distortion you like in something like Ps.

Actually, No Thank You.

Please don’t edit my images. Ever.

Rich

I don't assume everyone has faulty monitors.

I question the calibration and profiling of people's monitors only when they suggest the colours they see are somehow wrong or that something has gone awry with the editing.

A given image obviously will not render exactly the same on every screen and the differences can be significant when monitors are not calibrated or improperly, if at all, profiled.

I set up my images to look good and how I want on my particular screens. How they end up looking on other people's screens is obviously beyond my control.

You say you interpret images differently. Fair enough. I have noticed some moments in your comments recently where you have made some attempts to discuss the meaning in an image. Good. Let's continue. I previously explained what I tried to do with this shot. Do you think your adjustment has altered the concept of the image in any way?

Thanks for all the comments.

My title, from what I saw first glance, was Communication. Lovers, or friendly neighbours chatting over the fence. Also their antennae made me think of a cartoon with aliens communicating through them. It was only because I had that feeling about communication that I processed it. The pics didn't look too good out of the box - overcast and under the tree canopy.
The winner has to be minniev who took it a lot further and saw ballroom dancing. Intriguing what we can see in a pic when we can be objective.

Mike, yes. I don't like to crop too hard and prefer to leave other elements in a pic if suitable, especially grass in this type of situation. The only reason I cropped that far was because the grass on the left was almost white further down and there was a dry dead piece just under the butterflies.

Serendipity - Yes and no.
I'm quite sure you didn't plan the shot out. But I'm also sure that with lots of experience, you recognized the potential in a situation. You wouldn't have known how all the ducks were going to line up (couldn't resist that one) but you would have seen the the repeating shapes in the foreground and the touch of sun and possibly the birds in the sky and reached for the camera. That was the photographer. The final positioning might have been serendipity but again with some careful framing to get the bits where they worked best PP.
One of those "the more I work at it the luckier I get" kind of serendipity moments.

A clear example of a case in which distortion correction does not do the image any favours.
The corners leaning inwards in the original showing create a sense of immersion, with the viewer surrounding by the sights (and sounds; and smells!) of an asian urban environment with all its overwhelming impressions. Distortion = immersion = overwhelming.
The distortion "correction" undoes that. It results in an image with a large empty sky, a literal "black hole".
There is no composition anymore, just an unnatural feeling perspective.
Gone is the immersion.
The viewer floats out of the image into that large nothingness.

Thank you Roel. That's what I was getting at when I asked Dan what he felt his adjustment had done to meaning within the image and that's what I felt the adjustment changed. I didn't want to get too defensive about my own shot and there may are other interpretations to be found. In the case of Dan's adjustment, keeping his perspective correction but cropping just above the green head on the left would go a long way to keeping what I intended while straightening the verticals. I'd still prefer my original however because of the green head. The eyes engage with the viewer whereas the adjust meant changes the angle away to the right.

Yep, the "distortion" added to the sense of enclosed, but TBH it needs more along the bottom, you need to people to make it busy and you need them passing under the banner. Same shot but from closer to the ground.

Thanks. I think more people would be better too. Thought about it at the time but couldn't see an angle without blocking all the lights. Thinking about it now, maybe finding something to rest the camera on enabling a slower shutter speed, then letting people be reduced to movement blurs that would let the lights behind them show through? Something I'll try another time.

I like the distorted version because it raised questions about the flag going across the street. Is it really stretching all the way across the street? Is it high so you have to look up to see it, or low enough to brush your head as you walk under it? The "undistortion" removes that mystique.

It also unintentionally distorts, what is in my opinion the subtle yet most important element in the image - the little security camera up top, and in the middle of the street, keeping an eye on all the action.

For an image to be impactful, it must convey emotion and have soul. The original does that for me. It isn't necessarily a pleasant or inviting emotion, but it is emotion none the less. The "corrected" version, while more technically correct, is soulless IMO.

The distorted photo looks weird and unnatural. I have been down many overcrowded busy Asian streets and lanes where I definitely felt immersed in the surroundings without having buildings leaning unnaturally over me. The straightened version still gives me a sense of immersion and with more realism based on my experience in that type of situation. I agree with whoever said the photo needed more included below at the bottom.

Just wanted to mention that I find that this is a great shot !
Well done.