In this post are a couple of post-processings done after my initial edits, in which I discuss some of the finer details of the image that I had to re-process. For the ease of identifying, all images are the result of the initial edits, and all images on the right are my re-edits.
INITIAL EDIT RE-EDIT
For more than six months, I have been contented with the initial edit. Recently I was considering to select this for my portfolio, but the more I looked at it I can’t help but notice the yellow petals on the bottom slightly distracting. So I had it removed. After re-edit, it looks cleaner now. Other bits include stray bees and flies in the air. these details are negligible but I removed them out anyway.
This cube image, the more I look at it the more I feel proud of it. My initial edit was a simple opening up of shadows. I had put the initial edit up everywhere and showed everyone. When I got back to this image after not seeing this image for a period of time, I decided to try and take the edits a step further, by adding a detail extractor filter. I must say, I quite like the effect after applying the filter. It was a complete surprise I could still get away with more details even with this single raw file.
For this image, I was already extremely satisfied with the initial edit. I loved the contrast of colours, and the fact it was the building from this angle was almost symmetrical. If one thing I had to pick on, was the perspective of the building; somehow it still looked “flat” to me. I reviewed the image again under my own criticism and realised there were more details I had missed out: there were no lights in the window on the right side of the building, not very symmetrical after all. Even after I have printed after the re-edit, I discovered tiny red lights (from the building behind) on the right side of the dome. It’s a bit annoying because once I see it, I can’t unsee. I don’t know, somehow the building still looks flat, this might need to re-edit again. But I shall leave it as it is for now.
When I showed this image in both digital and printed form, I get a mix of critiques. Some liked the atmosphere, while some picked on the over-saturation of colours, that renders the image “unrealistic”. These feedbacks prompted me to re-look at my image again. I decided to tone down the blue saturation and make it slightly more contrast. I didnt like the desaturated version because it looked more like AdobeRGB accidentally downscaled to sRGB. I decided to go for a less-saturated version but a slightly more contrast; a bit of both world (middle one).
It is true that mistakes may reveal only when the image comes out in large prints. Well, prints are expensive so I have to train my eyes to look for detail and spot the blemishes and/or “mistakes” before I actually print it. But sometimes, I really do have to reprint.