Am I going to far??

[Paul Dumm]

I have been trying to get my photos looking better. Most of the time the color is washed out. Just plane yuck. I have been working on adding some Vibrance and Saturation. Also working with Exposure/ Brightness to get the Hisogram more near the mid range. Just would like to know if I am pushing it to far or getting close.    Before and after photos.

[Joe Copalman]

Maybe back off a bit on the saturation just a tad.  Other than that, much better looking.

[F-16_fixer]

FYI the difference between Vibrance and Saturation is that Vibrance is mostly used for shots with people in them.  It will raise the saturation of all colors except skin tones so your people don't end up looking like Oompa Loompas.  Saturation raises the saturation of every color.  So if your raising both then your really just doubling the saturation.  I only use Vibrance if it's a portrait and I want to make the surrounding colors pop. 

[Paul Dumm]

Trying something new again.
This time I used a Scott Kelby tip in CS4. I just used the Curves Black (shadows) eyedroper and White (highlight) eyedroper to color correct. Is it better or woest? Any other tips would be verry helpful.

Before


After

[Jeff D. Welker]

Hey Pablo:

Here are 2 cents from the newbie.

To answer your question; no, I don't think you went to far and I like your post processed image better. I typical like to add more color saturation to an image, which is what your second image looks like to me. I sometimes add too much saturation - a bad habit I'm working on. If this were my capture, I would have done a few things differently.

First - I would have isolated the adjustments you made to just the plane via a layer mask. It appears that you made your Curves adjustment globally and it increased the color saturation for everything in the image. This would help keep the background desaturated compared to the primary focal point (i.e. da plane). I believe this action would make it stand out and add dimension/pop. You could also accomplish the same thing by selecting the plane and runway/foreground, then using the Gaussian Blur tool (i.e. Filters>Blur>Gaussian Blur) to make the background slightly out of focus (flavor to suit your eye).

Second - I would have cloned-out some of the junk in the background. In the world of digital photography, especially documenting aviation history as we are doing on this site (whether we intend to or not), some folks consider the use of Clone tools in PS/CS to be akin to a sacrilegious act. Many juried photo competitions forbid the use of cloning in any submittals. All that being said, I love the clone tools and think they are wonderful for improving images (maybe I'm just more open to the notion of photographic heresy). For example, the van, dumpster and various other "stuff" in the background directly behind the cockpit area is distracting to my eye. If you cleaned/cloned this area up, it would be much better IMHO. Some may argue that this clutter is all part of an airport and should be left in the image. Again, clone to taste and be careful not to get carried away. I can't help you with what getting carried away actually is. It is like porn, I can't describe it but I know it when I see it  

Third/Lastly - I would enhance the smoke coming off the tires by selectively increasing the contrast and brightening the whites - in that area (only).

There you have it. The raving suggestions of a guy who barely understands what a PS/CS "slider" is, much less how to properly use them.

Post Script - If you are a "spotter" at heart, I wouldn't spend any time fooling with the image - your "straight" image is well done. If you are looking to improve your photography, especially post processing, go for it. If you spent the bucks on PS/CS, then you might as well use some of that horsepower on your images.

[Joe Copalman]

Biggest thing I notice is the slope of the horizon.  Several ways to skin that cat, but I find the level tool in Photoshop to work best. 

Regarding the background, that's actually a very rough clone job, as there is clutter upon clutter, and a lot of it is actually touching the aircraft.  Always a rough time when that happens, but it does have its place (ever notice how most of my shots from Willie lack the GM water tower in the background?). 

I do agree that isolating the changes to the aircraft would work a bit better.  I tend to just use the lasso tool for this.  Same goes for sharpening.