One picture, two views.

[plonq]

I took this picture back in 2007 when I was performing track maintenance duty up in western Manitoba. While the raw file for the picture has not changed over time, I have new software for processing the raws images now.

I reworked this picture because I was thinking about a post I read in a photography forum once, where the writer said, "Don't delete your RAW files." His contention was that as software improved over time, one could go back to older raw files and produce better finished works from them. I decided to put that to the test this morning, and ran one of my older pictures through some newer software.

These two are not a perfect sample to compare, since I was definitely going for a specific look when I ran this one through in 2007, rather than going for a natural appearance. Part of that was because the original was slightly underexposed because of the polariser and UV filters, but the software of the day limited me a bit as well.

There are elements in the older one that I like, and I can see why I would have pushed it in that direction when fixing it up.

Which one do you like better?

Comments

[tydence.livejournal.com]

I like the first one more.
In another 5 years or so, when that road is lined with skyscrapers and overrun with cyborgs, it will provide a fresh look at an older time that doesn't look like it was taken at that time. Much like the Kodachrome archives of today.

[kfops.livejournal.com]

Would it be odd to say I really like the sky in the first one and the highway in the second one?

I think this comes down to a personal preference on certain colours of blue, so I might be in the minority.

[plonq.livejournal.com]

When you say "first and second", I assume you mean "older and newer". Based on that assumption, I agree. When I colour corrected the first one, it was with an eye to bringing out the right shade of blue in the sky. In spite of the fact that I corrected it too warm, I actually prefer the colour that way. Also, that is closer to how I remember it looking through the polariser.

The biggest difference in the processing to my eye is the correction for the lens distortion. The older picture looks like everything is getting sucked toward the centre, but I could not fix that any more in the old software without distorting it badly in other ways. The newer shot gives a much more accurate depiction of how flat and remote the area was, IMO. Kind of pretty in its own desolate way.

[dakhun.livejournal.com]

The old one looks too dark and the sky and the road are the wrong colours as if I am wearing slightly tinted sunglasses while looking at it.
Can't really compare them any closer than that because the maximum resolution available of the old image is rather low.

[plonq.livejournal.com]

>slightly tinted sunglasses while looking at it.

My camera tends to underexpose pictures, especially with a relatively slow lens like the one I was using, and with a polariser and UV filter installed.

Some of the problems with the older picture are from my botched attempts at colour and gamma correction (of the two, it is actually truer to the raw image), and the rest are a result of software. I corrected the colours too warm, did not boost the exposure enough (it looked good on my laptop, and I only noticed how dark it was when I got home), and I over-sharpened it. One of the reasons why I scaled the size of the first one down (the other being the badly throttled internet connection at my hotel) was to mask some of the post-processing.

On the software side, its methods for dealing with lens distortion were slightly wanting. The raw picture suffered from a noticeable pincushion effect because I shot it at a fairly wide zoom, but software only let me compensate for some of that before its own effects began to make the picture look like it was reflected off a fun house mirror.

Other than the trace of vignette effect in the corners of the sky (filters encroaching on the shot), the newer picture is almost free of lens distortion.

If I ever get laid up for a couple of weeks and feel bored, I may start going through my older pictures and seeing if I can rescue some of them.

[lowen-kind.livejournal.com]

I like the "newer" shot better.

A bit more "dramatic" with the distant clouds being more distinct.

[branwyn.livejournal.com]

Ah, reminds me of home!

I'd say that I think the second pic (lower on the page) looks better from an aesthetic point of view, though I think the first pic more accurately captures what it would have really looked like at the time.

B.

[dronon.livejournal.com]

I prefer the top one more; the clouds, the brighter atmosphere, nd the lower one seems to have a yellow/orange tinge.

[fuzzytoedcollie.livejournal.com]

The upper, older picture feels like it was taken on a baking-hot, sunny day, the sort of one you squint at through sunglasses, it's so bright.

The lower, newer picture feels like an album cover, with saturated colors. Add walkway stripes and the Beatles crossing the road and it would be perfect :D

Just how it feels on my monitor :)