Ok, probably every photographer has taken at least one picture of a lonely tree, I know I have taken a few. I took this today while walking in Greenwich park.
I posted about this very interesting post from Wouter before and want to post a few new questions here.
The top picture is my post-processed picture and it is how I like this to look but it did take qute a lot of processing work to get it to look like this as you can see from the unprocessed picture at the bottom.
Now, which picture do you prefer? Is the post-processed picture better or do you prefer the original? Does the post-processed picture change the reality in a bad way or is it still close enough to the original scene? How much post-processing should someone do and should we always make it clear that a picture is post-processed? What if you could achieve the same look in camera with scene modes, would it be a post-processed picture?
I find that sometimes I do quite a lot of post-processing to have the picture match my vision or even change my vision after playing around with the picture in post-processing, although I have always a pretty good idea of how it should look like.
I want to tell you also about another very interesting post that I forgot to mention before. Regular reader and fellow blogger Richard has posted a very interesting post about my WOOOW picture here. It's worth a read and I enjoyed reading about his feelings and view towards my picture.