| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/13/2007 04:53:39 AM · #1 |
In the past, I have got comments that some of my photographs are overeditted. I really do not know what is overeditting.
Consider these two photographs (editted and uneditted). I am sure that the actual scene would have been nearer to the uneditted image. Is this image overeditted?
  |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 04:59:06 AM · #2 |
| I would say 'well edited.' It may lack fidelity with the actual scene you saw with your eyes, but the edited version is a very powerful representation of these majestic creatures. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 05:01:55 AM · #3 |
The edit is rich, deep and warm, and does a very nice job on setting a mood and bringing out the textures from what would have been a rather boring, true to real life version.
The amount of editing looks like a lot, probably wasn't that much in reality, and in context of this image, it worked well.
There is no real formula for too much or too little.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 05:21:36 AM · #4 |
| considering that you came 2nd for it, I wouldn't say it was overedited. I really like it though =) |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 05:22:16 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by lucienaw:
considering that you came 2nd for it, I wouldn't say it was overedited. I really like it though =) |
Not his pics actually - they are Cindi's
:)
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 05:24:21 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Brad:
Not his pics actually - they are Cindi's
:) |
 |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 05:30:31 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Brad:
Originally posted by lucienaw:
considering that you came 2nd for it, I wouldn't say it was overedited. I really like it though =) |
Not his pics actually - they are Cindi's
:) |
Yeah. I agree. LOL. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 06:32:52 AM · #8 |
well I understand that you are trying to learn what is considered over-editted...but wow, I think I'd be a little bit miffed if my image was called out to learn from. I would think you should use your own images for this but who knows maybe you talked to cindi about it first....never mind
Message edited by author 2007-06-13 09:53:57. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 06:45:15 AM · #9 |
It's a very powerful editing jog, very well done. Not even especially extreme by my standards, actually. I doubt many people would look at the entered image and say it was "overedited", simply because the editing doesn't call attention to itself; it looks strong and natural.
I don't think you can judge "overediting" by comparing tot he original capture; that makes no sense. Judge the image in its own right and on its own terms; if it looks artificial, if the editing draws attention to itself in obvious ways, then it may be overdone. Although plenty of times I have presented images that DO flaunt their editing, as an intentional approach to pictorial representation. They don't mostly score very well, though a few of them have.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 09:09:31 AM · #10 |
As Robert pointed out, just because editing significantly changes a photo doesn't mean it's over-edited. Over-editing results in the editing becoming noticable. The editing itself then become s a focus of the shot, not the subject matter. If that's what you're going for, wonderful, and if not, then you've over-edited.
A few common "over-editing" problems:
- Noticeable bright halos around objects, caused by overuse of sharpening.
- Unnatural levels of saturation
- Too-aggressive noise reduction, resulting in loss of all fine detail and a "plastic-like" appearance
- Strong tonal adjustments, resulting in posterization |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 09:13:24 AM · #11 |
Just noticed this thread. I don't mind my images being used. Learn away.
The actual editing done here, as was mentioned before, is very little. Grab the original and do this: crop, convert to sepia, sharpen..... already it is very close to the final version. A little more tweaking here & there and viola. :)
To me the word "overprocessed" is used when processing has harmed the image and in this case, I think, I stopped at enhancing the image.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 09:20:43 AM · #12 |
Here's a real example of overeditting:
original (just resized): 
over-editted entry: 
There was a happy medium in there somewhere but I went past it ;-) |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 09:44:18 AM · #13 |
| Can I stop a discussion cold in its tracks or what? :::pats self on back ... wanders off to look for other threads to kill::: |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 09:51:08 AM · #14 |
(I got you covered, Mary =)
Cindi's elephants are beautifully done.
There's a fine and subjective line between well-edited and overedited, but it's the photographers decision to make.
I tend to agree with Fritz - I prefer subtlety. I don't care how much it's processed, as long as I enjoy the result and the editing doesn't become the focus.
Oh and he forgot: people tend to way overdo eyes. They should look natural! (IMO)
Message edited by author 2007-06-13 09:52:43. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 10:03:42 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
Here's a real example of overeditting:
original (just resized):
over-editted entry:
There was a happy medium in there somewhere but I went past it ;-) |
Is that in Richmond? |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 10:18:23 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
Is that in Richmond? |
Close; Fredericksburg. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 10:20:44 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by ragamuffingirl:
Is that in Richmond? |
Close; Fredericksburg. |
Richmond has a similar looking train bridge that I absolutely love. Train bridge |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 11:18:54 AM · #18 |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 11:42:10 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... However, most DPC voters don't care for those types of effects no matter how appropriate. |
Bingo.
And I would say, because the editing becomes the focus. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:00:57 PM · #20 |
At the time I thought it was cool.
Wait - scalvert did too - guess that officially made it cool.
PP gimmicks & over edits, especially intentional ones DON'T do well here.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:05:26 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by idnic:
To me the word "overprocessed" is used when processing has harmed the image and in this case, I think, I stopped at enhancing the image. |
Exactly. Nothing about the entry screams "I've been edited" It's a nice natural looking editing job and you are the edit goddess :-)
|
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:08:09 PM · #22 |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:21:54 PM · #23 |
For another data point, I believe my shot in Pure is on the upper edge of acceptability - just this side of the line, IMO. But I guess you'll have to wait a week to find out what I mean... =)
In the mean time, check out PPChallenge. Starting tomorrow - there should be some good portrait edits to vote on.
Message edited by author 2007-06-13 12:23:45. |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:37:19 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
For another data point, I believe my shot in Pure is on the upper edge of acceptability - just this side of the line, IMO. But I guess you'll have to wait a week to find out what I mean... =)
In the mean time, check out PPChallenge. Starting tomorrow - there should be some good portrait edits to vote on. |
 smurfguy I forgot my password to you site and have requested by email several times but have not received a response. Am I able to participate anymore? What should I do? |
|
|
|
06/13/2007 12:39:25 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
In the mean time, check out PPChallenge. Starting tomorrow - there should be some good portrait edits to vote on. |
Looks like I should too ... though I don't really have time to participate fully. : ( |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 05:28:32 PM EDT.
