Joy 2 (DSS 16 possibility)

dlplumer

I know many of you are not fans of selective coloring, but nevertheless I'd like your opinion of this shot. (No photoshop magic used).



Thanks,

Dan

Tango

i lov select coloring.... and i love this shot... thanks for taking the blur off her hand from before revisions.

speedsk8r

Wow that butterfly looks very good what program did you use too, clean it up.

dlplumer

speedsk8r wrote:

Wow that butterfly looks very good what program did you use too, clean it up.

Thanks. The butterfly is untouched.

Eia

I like this...better than the others... it is soft and colorful at the same time and zeroes in on the subject. Selective coloring has its place just like any other 'art-ed' photo!

jeffreaux2

Dan,

My personal preference on selective coloring is that ....well....Im kinda done with it. I have seen it put to good use in a handfull of cityscapes, but more often than not it really doesn't work well. In "people" we often see BW headshots with only the eyes in color. These types of shots say to me "I have photoshop" and really, I get little else from the effect.

So, as you can see....any opinion on "this shot" is already tainted due to my personal preference. Sorry.

There are alternatives to selective color over BW that can also give the same punch with out being.... selective color over black and white.

Maybe a layer converted to sepia.....over and opacity blended with a slightly de saturated color layer....and a third layer with the vivid high contrast butterfly? Something in a more subtle approach to the selective color idea?


Or...take it with a grain of salt....as I said....Im just not into selective color as a processing choice.

NeilL

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Dan,

My personal preference on selective coloring is that ....well....Im kinda done with it. I have seen it put to good use in a handfull of cityscapes, but more often than not it really doesn't work well. In "people" we often see BW headshots with only the eyes in color. These types of shots say to me "I have photoshop" and really, I get little else from the effect.

So, as you can see....any opinion on "this shot" is already tainted due to my personal preference. Sorry.

There are alternatives to selective color over BW that can also give the same punch with out being.... selective color over black and white.

Maybe a layer converted to sepia.....over and opacity blended with a slightly de saturated color layer....and a third layer with the vivid high contrast butterfly? Something in a more subtle approach to the selective color idea?


Or...take it with a grain of salt....as I said....Im just not into selective color as a processing choice.

Valuable contribution, thanks, Jeff.

NeilL

Dan, it is confusing what the real subject is.

If it's the insect, well, there it is, with very distinct hand.

If it's the girl, as I think it should be (darn I never use that word), and believe it really to be (or at least, as well), then it's not at all flattering, and not very interesting. She is dissolving out of existence in the OOF like writing on a wet page. What remains of her neck looks like ET. The 'hand' on her shoulder L looks like it belongs to King Kong.

You have got an affecting moment there . But it's the girl who provides the emotional content, to which we can respond. And would more strongly if she were not so evanescent.

The butterfly is (just) a butterfly. If they fly your kite (sorry to mix metaphors), then you'll get a charge. As the girl is. And it is her pleasure which lifts the pic onto another plane. But her pleasure is barely accessible. It is as detached from us as her hand is from her.

Please forgive my apparent flippancy . I really do think you have shown here a great eye for an emotional occasion, simple but affecting. But to reach its potential it needs both the butterfly and the girl in there.

dlplumer

NeilL wrote:

Dan, it is confusing what the real subject is.

If it's the insect, well, there it is, with very distinct hand.

If it's the girl, as I think it should be (darn I never use that word), and believe it really to be (or at least, as well), then it's not at all flattering, and not very interesting. She is dissolving out of existence in the OOF like writing on a wet page. What remains of her neck looks like ET. The 'hand' on her shoulder L looks like it belongs to King Kong.

You have got an affecting moment there . But it's the girl who provides the emotional content, to which we can respond. And would more strongly if she were not so evanescent.

The butterfly is (just) a butterfly. If they fly your kite (sorry to mix metaphors), then you'll get a charge. As the girl is. And it is her pleasure which lifts the pic onto another plane. But her pleasure is barely accessible. It is as detached from us as her hand is from her.

Please forgive my apparent flippancy . I really do think you have shown here a great eye for an emotional occasion, simple but affecting. But to reach its potential it needs both the butterfly and the girl in there.

Thanks Neil for taking the time with what I believe is a very good assessment