Humble opinions needed

reyvee61reyvee61 Registered Users Posts: 1,877 Major grins
edited April 18, 2011 in People
I've been really diving into LR3 and revisiting older images. I'd like your honest opinions on which version you prefer, the original version which I processed in CNX2 or the new version with LR3:


CNX2 original version

873421943_DazQ9-L-4.jpg

LR3 version

_dsc3440-lr-L.jpg


Thanks in advance
Yo soy Reynaldo

Comments

  • Chris02Chris02 Registered Users Posts: 62 Big grins
    edited April 17, 2011
    Hi,
    Not an expert by any means but I prefer the first as the curtains behind are not prevalent but the second as the performers are clearer.

    Hows that for sitting on the fence, so to speak.
    C
    LR 4.1 Nik Silver efex 2
    D90 + D50 Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
    Nikon 55-300 mm f4.5-5.6G ED DX AF-S VR
    Landscapes, Sport and Buildings are my bag.
    Chris White Cheltenham England
  • SnowgirlSnowgirl Registered Users Posts: 2,155 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2011
    Chris02 wrote: »
    Hi,
    Not an expert by any means but I prefer the first as the curtains behind are not prevalent but the second as the performers are clearer.

    Hows that for sitting on the fence, so to speak.
    C

    Have to agree. The curtain fold in #2 going up between the two bodies / faces is distracting.

    Also fence sitting.
    Creating visual and verbal images that resonate with you.
    http://www.imagesbyceci.com
    http://www.facebook.com/ImagesByCeci
    Picadilly, NB, Canada
  • bbeck4x4bbeck4x4 Registered Users Posts: 159 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2011
    I prefer the second, the colors are bolder and they are brighter, my suggestion is to take the brush tool in the development module and darken just that fold that is running between them, although it is interesting how the curtain fold follows a line in the floor.
    Brian Beck
    Spanish Fork, Utah 84660- 360 Virtual Tours - Landscapes
    Google + Facebook Website
  • zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2011
    Not really much different, skin tones are warmer and a tad brighterin the second shot. It could be brighter still with a bit of sharpening and a levels adjust.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • VayCayMomVayCayMom Registered Users Posts: 1,870 Major grins
    edited April 17, 2011
    2nd one hands down. I am not seeing what others have mentioned, like the curtain and I just calibrated.
    Trudy
    www.CottageInk.smugmug.com

    NIKON D700
  • zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    ...I don't see the curtain either.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • lanaerlanaer Registered Users Posts: 78 Big grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    I also prefer the second, though I do see the curtain fold and think it would be better if that were removed, the overall look of the performers is much improved.
  • bloomphotogbloomphotog Registered Users Posts: 582 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    CNX2 will give you the best quality conversion. I would just warm up the temperature a bit and maybe a little saturation and curve adjustments.
    joshmartinezphotography.com
  • Mike JMike J Registered Users Posts: 1,029 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    lanaer wrote: »
    I also prefer the second, though I do see the curtain fold and think it would be better if that were removed, the overall look of the performers is much improved.
    +1 for the 2nd version.
    Mike J

    Comments and constructive criticism always welcome.
    www.mikejulianaphotography.com
    Facebook
  • Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    For what my two cents is worth...

    I think I would like to see something half way between the two. The first is just a bit flat and I think the second is a bit over saturated. Then again, I've been told my monitor is a bit bright.

    Regards,
  • HackboneHackbone Registered Users Posts: 4,027 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    Between the two the second one has more punch to it.
    Charles
    www.cameraone.biz
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    Hackbone wrote: »
    Between the two the second one has more punch to it.

    15524779-Ti.gif

    Also, the colors are much better in #2. Look at that blue thing in her hair and the wood floor.


    BTW; I just recalibrated yesterday, and I don't see the curtain fold.
    Randy
  • Bryce WilsonBryce Wilson Registered Users Posts: 1,586 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    OK, now I'm on a different monitor that has been calibrated recently. Number 2 is most certainly the winner from all aspects. The over saturation I saw in the other monitor isn't there on this one. The curtain fold is there but only faintly and isn't a distraction at all.
  • reyvee61reyvee61 Registered Users Posts: 1,877 Major grins
    edited April 18, 2011
    I appreciate everyones feedback as this will help me on my future conversions in LR...
    I find the work flow to be far better in LR and this after resisting change for a few years of doing everything in CNX2 with Color Efex Pro I'm beginning to realize the power of LR.
    CNX2 is great but I believe LR3 has got the edge with the new noise reduction which is where this type of theater and dance stuff can really be a bear.
    I will go to large print to see if the differences are noticeable or not.
    I have to find a good balance for prints and web images :D
    I do see the crease in the curtain on my display though minimal and I agree that the second is a tad more saturated than the first but I didn't add any from the panel.
    Yo soy Reynaldo
Sign In or Register to comment.