# Why do people prefer saturated images? and is this good or bad in todays digital age?



## erotavlas (Apr 15, 2013)

Does anyone know the answer to the first question?  Why do people prefer saturation in images, psychologically speaking?

I was first wondering about this when reading about screen technology in smartphones.  mainly IPS vs AMOLED.  IPS displays seem to display a more natural image, but the AMOLED screen usually always are more saturated, but they may not be as true to the original. 

Furthermore smartphones that use the AMOLED displays are actually best sellers (example Samsung Galaxy series).  (compared to phones with LCD technology) I mean I'm just guessing that perhaps a potential customer seeing an AMOLED display side by side with the LCD(IPS) panel would probably prefer the AMOLED display...not sure but thats what I think

Then I found this article online, but it doesn't really explain the psychological reason why saturation is preferred.
The Psychology of Saturation - On Landscape

Even though there were methods to saturate images in the past with print and film (example Velvia) I think it is a more common practice today, as it is easier to do.  I feel all digital content I see online is so punchy and not representative of what the world really looks like. Moreover what happens when all images are saturated by the device itself, you have no choice but to view everything with unnatural saturated colours

Secondly Is this a good thing?  When people look away from their devices and back to the real world, will they turn their eyes in disappointment back to the false digital images?


----------



## alvintran1998 (Apr 15, 2013)

IMO, and this is totally just my thinking, I like saturations on AMOLED displays because the colors pop more than LCD display. But the main feature I prefer of AMOLED display over LCD is it's blackness. If you've ever compared the black of amoled displays to LCD, there's a big difference. The black on AMOLED is truly dark black while black on LCD is light of light black, dark gray. Also, I don't think a lot of people buy their smart phones just because of its display. I think the galaxy line with its AMOLED display is so popular is because of its software and hardware and marketing, just solely on display. Just my two cents. 

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 15, 2013)

You do realize that no image in existence portrays reality as our eyes do, right?

"False digital image" doesn't make any sense.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 15, 2013)

It goes wayyyyyyyy back, to the era when prostitutes first painted their lips red, to distinguish/identify themselves...well, wait...many bird species also have vividly saturated plumage, and the females prefer the ones with the gaudiest coloration...hmm...not sure...


----------



## amolitor (Apr 16, 2013)

There's a similar thing with contrast. There's at least a couple things going on here. People like visual drama and pop. They like visually strong contrasts, it's easier to see what's going on when the RED apple is placed against the GREEN background, and the difference between the two is visually dramatic -- the tones and/or colors are widely separated. There are also trends. We associate high contrast landscapes with quality. So, more contrast is obviously more quality, right? Well, until it starts looking weird.

Then you get a bunch of saturated images and high contrast black and white landscapes running around right at the edge of "weird looking" but not quite. These are the "highest quality, most dramatic" pictures we'll accept.

Then the line between "normal" and "weird" moves, it's pushed further out by all these images crowding up against it.

Then we wind up with endless crummy pictures of Half Dome with jet black skies and puffy white blocked up clouds. And we get fruit that looks like some insane glowing plastic. And everyone loves it! Yay!


----------



## Dikkie (Apr 16, 2013)

... said Dinosaur Derrel.


----------



## erotavlas (Apr 16, 2013)

*Evolution of color saturation*




I say we're between frames 4 and 5 right now,
So if frame 1 is 1900, frame 2 is 1935, frame 3 1970, frame 4 2005,

then it rapidly spirals downward as technology takes over
frame 5 is 2022, frame 6 is 2030, frame 7 is 2034, frame 8 is 2032

So there you have it, by 2032 our images will look like the last frame


----------



## Josh66 (Apr 16, 2013)

erotavlas said:


> *Evolution of color saturation*
> 
> View attachment 42453
> 
> ...



I think we're well into frame 5, approaching frame 6 now.  Frame 4 was the mid 90's maybe...


----------



## KenC (Apr 16, 2013)

I've already seen stuff that looks like the last frame.  Some people just can't wait.


----------



## Pallycow (Apr 16, 2013)

Try working in a print shop.  lol

Hear it all the time "the colors don't look like they did on my computer"  usually on oversaturated crap.  Worst is greens...people and their crazy greens.  In a wet lab, you can't match their crazy ass colors if they insist but instead print it real, ya know like a tree should be.  But if they insist, we'll use the large dry lab to print, on which we can match any color on it.  Yellows are a ***** too.

but yeah, it's a trend thing, like others.  Usually among new photogs.  I know I did it...I thought it was cool to over sat them.  Then I went back to creating clean, sharp photos...or at least trying to; and let the quality of the photo support itself vs. trying to spiffy it up to support a lacking photo.

my 2 cents anyway.


----------



## Pallycow (Apr 16, 2013)

the other thing that's hard for some to get is luminosity.  Your photos are backlit by your damn computer monitor/lcd screen.  Of course it is more vibrant than on a print.  Dur.  Some get it...most don't.

On photos I know I am prepping for print, I generally set it brighter than normal, knowing it will be dimmer (lack of better words) on print.  If I'm just showing for web...then I process it for web.  Wether I print at whcc, mpix, or lab at work, I always set it brighter with more luminosity so I am not disappointed when print comes.


----------



## Dikkie (Apr 18, 2013)

KenC said:


> I've already seen stuff that looks like the last frame. Some people just can't wait.



They went back in history to show us what they shot there in future


----------



## Kolia (Apr 18, 2013)

Same thing happens withTV, audio, food, lifted trucks, moded Civics...


----------



## KenC (Apr 18, 2013)

Dikkie said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> > I've already seen stuff that looks like the last frame. Some people just can't wait.
> ...



Damn time travelers!  Always causing trouble!


----------



## bennybenny (Jan 27, 2020)

Derrel said:


> It goes wayyyyyyyy back, to the era when prostitutes first painted their lips red, to distinguish/identify themselves...well, wait...many bird species also have vividly saturated plumage, and the females prefer the ones with the gaudiest coloration...hmm...not sure...



Brother, prostitution and pictures are a different thing.


----------



## SquarePeg (Jan 27, 2020)

This thread is 7 years old.


----------



## Grandpa Ron (Jan 27, 2020)

I think the saturation fade is like bokeh, or full contrast black and white street photos, or  photo-shopping sky lines into pictures etc. etc. It is the thing to do. The latest novelty, an attempt at photo arts, our you supply the reason.

The point is, people find enjoyment on doing so and will continue to do so in the future. Some of these methods may even become standard practice.

However, like many photographers. I discovered that my super whizz bang digital will also take the kind of photos I like, regardless of any current trend.  

If I could guess the latest fade, I would have bet on bottled water


----------



## Derrel (Jan 27, 2020)

Nothing like digging up threads from 2013!!!


----------



## snowbear (Jan 27, 2020)




----------



## AlanKlein (Jan 28, 2020)

I like Velvia 50, colors that pop.  If you really want to see pop, check out Ken Rockwell's photos.  I think he shoots digital at +4 saturation.


----------



## Soocom1 (Jan 28, 2020)

Lord I was so hoping that this one would die. 

The original op was about saturation on cell phones. 

OK.   In my ever never ending pursuit of useless information, I read in a book on photography written int eh 1960's and updated twice, (back when people were actually educated, but I digress) (so I have a tendency to believe it over contemporary Youtube inspired Bull Trout), 
was that the film 9or in today';s case digital sensor) is actually recording what is ACTUALLY there. 
NOT what we THINK is there. 

Bear with me.   

Here is an example of where I am going with this.. What color are the dogs? 
color illusion trick - Bing images


Our eyes and brains deceive us.  Look at impeachment! 

Seriously though, what we THINK is the right color, or what we THINK looks really good, saturated, correct etc, is all in our teeny tiny non-vulcan brains.   

AMOLED, LCD, Cathode Ray, three color or whatever is all subjective.


----------



## AlanKlein (Jan 28, 2020)

I use a calibrated monitor from NEC.  I hope they see OK.   

Seriously.  I try not to oversaturate.  When I get to the point that I think someone will notice, I'll back off a little.  So the colors are saturated, but only to the point that they still look normal.  Does that make sense?
Here's my Velvia 50's Search: velvia | Flickr


----------



## waday (Jan 28, 2020)

I tend to always oversaturate, which is why my plants always die.


----------



## limr (Jan 28, 2020)

I am oversaturated with this topic.

Hoping this one would die? Then let it die. Just...let it go...


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 28, 2020)

Maybe you'll need to get out the 'official' TPF padlock!


----------



## waday (Jan 28, 2020)

limr said:


> I am oversaturated with this topic.
> 
> Hoping this one would die? Then let it die. Just...let it go...


But it’s so much fun; a thread overfilled with overreactions to oversaturated images with lots of overly, and overtly, annoying side comments.


----------



## SquarePeg (Jan 28, 2020)

waday said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> > I am oversaturated with this topic.
> ...



That's a bit over the top.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 28, 2020)

Some solid Velvia images,  Alan Klein!


----------



## Derrel (Jan 28, 2020)

Astia and Velvia fought in what was it? 1999 at The Bellagio in UFC 9? OR am I confused?


----------



## waday (Jan 28, 2020)

SquarePeg said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> > limr said:
> ...


I meant no offense... I hope you can get over it in time.


----------



## petrochemist (Jan 29, 2020)

I think it's a similar thing to TV settings.
In years past when walking around towns I've seen loads of TVs in peoples front rooms that were obviously set to maximum saturation.
It's as if they are thinking I paid for colour, so I'm going to get as much of it as I can!
Personally I couldn't watch such images for even 2 minutes, in general I tend to prefer slightly muted colours. High saturation often works well on very simple compositions, but rarely otherwise IMO.


----------



## snowbear (Jan 29, 2020)

Come on, folks; let this zombie return to the grave with dignity.  The OP hasn't been around for a couple of years.


----------



## terri (Jan 29, 2020)

vintagesnaps said:


> Maybe you'll need to get out the 'official' TPF padlock!


Done!


----------

