by DirkVermeirre on Sat 6 Mar 2010 23:41
Hello,
To start I must say that personally I strive to bring post processing to as low as possible. Mostly adjustments in contrast and levels and for portraits sometimes dodging and burning (like in the old darkroom). But that's because I prefer to put as little time as possible with the computers to keep as much time as possible to make new photographs. And because I'm not a purist I have nothing against photoshopping even when it's heavy. I also don't care if an image looks more like a painting (or a painting like a photo), for me it's the resulted image that has to be strong, interesting, artistic, etc.. How it was done isn't crucial and the last time Photoshopped images are more and more seen in leading art galleries. There are also several well known photographers who are coloring their images with the hand and others are mixing painting (real painting) with photos. Many well known painters are starting from photos to make their painting. The mixing of these two forms is increasing more and more in my opinion.
So now back to your images. I like the result of your images, the color tone settings, the warm effect and the end results. But I have one remark. Because it clearly are realistic images there's something wrong with the light (and the direction of the light). As I see in your images, because the sky is more clear at the down side it has to be a sunset or sunrise and then the much lighter parts in the foreground are impossible because the main light source is behind the scene. That makes it unnatural for a real life situation. In the first I see also that the lowest part of the sky as another hue (more going to blueish and white what is not normal in such a colored sky, the most part would normally be the most yellow part of the sky (or going to white around the sun when she would be in the image due to overexposure for that part). Fog could cause that effect also but then it's strange that it's not above or beneath the small part that we see now. In the second image the light source is situated on the low right part of the sky. The fact that it's lighter in that corner of the sky indicates that the sun is sitting there on a low level. Then it's strange to have the lightest parts in the image on the lowest houses and the bushes in the foreground. I think that if you could make the sky more even, without the light sitting at the bottom of the sky, you would gain credibility about the light in your images.
Painters are giving much attention to the light in their works and so I think that the problem isn't if your images are going to much in the direction of paintings, for me the only problem is in the light spread over parts of your images.
With kind regards,
Dirk
