Is this photo too blue?

(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue
overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

"Cynicor" wrote in message
news
(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue elements
in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue overall.
Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just thought I'd ask a
few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

I like it just the way it is, great DOF!

Cynicor wrote:
(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too
blue overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care
about! :-D
http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

Assuming you mean the biggest picture on the RHS, it looks fine to me. Of
course, I don't know what the original scene was like.....

David

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:54:13 -0400, Cynicor wrote:

(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue
overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

It seemed very pleasing at first, but eventually the water started
to come across as unnaturally, excessively blue. But not blue enough
for those that prefer really cool shots or perhaps a Cyanicor.


http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

Cynicor wrote:
(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue
overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

It's a nice pic as is, even though the water and sky are actually a
little too blue.
So the answer depends on what you are trying to present: the scene as
it actually was or your interpretation of that scene. I fiddled around
with it for about 30 seconds and got it to look a lot more natural, but
I prefer your rendition the best.

If you have Photoshop CS2 try this:
Go to Image/Adjustments/Replace Color.
With the color picker click on a dark area of the sky.
Use the following settings:
Fuzziness: 150
Hue: -2
Saturation: -10
Lightness: +20

Season to taste.

That will get you closer to how the scene actually appeared.
But you'll probably prefer your version.

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:54:13 -0400, Cynicor
wrote:

(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue
overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

On the monitor I'm looking at now, yes, a little too blue. I'm not
sure what you can learn from that though, since each monitor is
different. I'm just an amateur, but I'm always wondering which monitor
I should "trust" of the several I look at on a regular basis. I think
the answer is "none", but when putting up a web site you have to make
a decision.

Greg Guarino

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:54:13 -0400, Cynicor
wrote:

(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue
elements in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue
overall. Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just
thought I'd ask a few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

To me. shot #11 does "not" seem too blue in terms of the water
or sky color (saturation) especially when compared to shot #12 which
is a darker blue but it works. That said I think shot #11 just has
too much blue in it as a percentage of the picture area, there is
little else to balance it so to me it feels a bit cold.

Shot #12 I like much better because the blue is broken up
better with other colors, hence to me it seems much warmer even though
it has a much deeper blue tone to the water. IMHO both are very good
shots & the DOF in #11 is outstanding.

There is only 1 suggestion I can offer & it's likely a poor 1
because it involves changing the picture from what it actually was to
something else in Post Production.

If you changed the color of the sky to a warmer color as if it
were taken closer to sunset, that might help offset the massive amount
(area) of blue in the water in the picture. You might also want/need
to add some of that same color tone on the white reflected off the
water. This is generally something I try to avoid doing but in this
case it might be worth trying it to see if you like the effect better.
If you like it modified, you could post both with 1 labeled "warmer
version" so people will know which is true to the actual conditions.
Aside from this suggestion I have nothing else to offer.

This is just the opinion of an "amateur" photographer, though
I have been @ it for nearly 30 years now in film & 6 years in digital.

Respectfully, DHB


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

No
Jim
"Cynicor" wrote in message
news
(Not THAT "blue", the actual color blue.) It's got a lot of blue elements
in the landscape, but I think that I adjusted it to be too blue overall.
Other people I've spoken to say they like it as is. Just thought I'd ask a
few dozen strangers whose opinions I don't care about! :-D

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95071146

Thanks for everyone's input, even though I vowed not to listen to it. It
definitely prints out too blue for my tastes, like it's fake. I took a
bit of time with it to fix the blue like Bret suggested, and I added a
bit of a warming filter to the sky/mountain, then brightened the land in
the middle distance a bit. I'm going to have to calibrate a monitor and
work on it some more.

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95372191

(It's sharp because I used the 50/1.8 prime instead of the 18-200 zoom.
I can notice quite a difference in sharpness in photos like this.)

"Cynicor" wrote in message
t...
Thanks for everyone's input, even though I vowed not to listen to it. It
definitely prints out too blue for my tastes, like it's fake. I took a bit
of time with it to fix the blue like Bret suggested, and I added a bit of
a warming filter to the sky/mountain, then brightened the land in the
middle distance a bit. I'm going to have to calibrate a monitor and work
on it some more.

http://trupin.smugmug.com/gallery/824709/1/95372191

(It's sharp because I used the 50/1.8 prime instead of the 18-200 zoom. I
can notice quite a difference in sharpness in photos like this.)

What does it look like when you print it?