# Color selected photos....whats your take?



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

It has been brought to my attention that Color selected photos are unprofessional and amaturish. I was unaware of this, I like color selected photos. I wanna hear from you all about this. This is the pic that was commented on about color selection. May not be the best choice but I actually like this pic. I was told this pic especially didnt work but was not told why. I truly am curious and do not by any means consider myself a Pro.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 18, 2013)

When *Adobe Photodeluxe* was the amateur image editing/manipulation software of choice for amateurs, back in the late 1990's, selective color was one of the hot, new "special effects". The roots of the disdain for selective color date back to around that time...when wedding shooters would take a bridal photo with the bride holding her bouquet--with the bouquet in glorious, resplendent full color, and the bride in God-awful B&W tones. A year or two later, hordes of weekend warrior baby photographers were ripping off Anne Geddes, and dressing babies in huge "daisy" and "chrysanthemum" costumes, with you guessed it--black and white baby faces surrounded by huge, stupid-looking colored fake flower blossoms.

So, the roots of selective color being a newbie "Oh-wow-sooooo-kewl,man!" kind of effect go way back to the early days of digital cameras. It has never, ever overcome the stigma.

Selective color is the mullet hairstyle of the photo world. Selective color is the wife-beater and a 16-ounce can of Hamms beer of the underclass. Selective color is the hitch-hiking to see your girlfriend at the womens prison of white trash society. Selective color is the ________________ of ______________.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jul 18, 2013)

I think selective color is fine as long as the thing that is selectively colored is the most interesting thing in your photo!

Doing a portrait where the person is B&W and some random object is colored is dumb, because you're drawing attention away from the person who is the whole point of a portrait. This would be the case in all of the examples Derrel mentions above, for example.

It's much trickier and rarer to make the color draw your eye to what should be the main subject. But if you do, it is okay.  Not fantastic still, but okay. Still don't overuse it (as in more than a few times ever probably), and reserve it for times when there really is one obvious popout color that other colors in the photo are legitimately distracting from.  Even then, I usually wouldn't do full selective color, personally.  I'd up the saturation a few points on the target and bump it down a few points elsewhere, with feathering.  Like a dodge or burn, sort of.


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

Awesome these are the real world answers I am looking for. Thank you so much for your thoughts and I look forward to seeing more. I wasnt doing any photography at that time and have never been a real trendy person so I was unaware of this aspect of it. I do agree that those baby shots were terrible and should be forgotten...


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 18, 2013)

Using red in a large portion of the image seems to overpower the black and white. I think too the reflection off the car makes for a mottled red and white which might be why this doesn't work so well as much as anything. 

I think a little goes a long way with selective color, if it's used I think a small amount of color that's in a small area of the photo that's solid and not too textured looks better. 

Maybe having just the front section of the car in red, with the logo in white, could work if you wanted to bring attention to that, but I'm not sure if even that would work. (I suppose you could make copies and do some experimenting but I'm not sure if the selective color works well in this photo.)


----------



## Gavjenks (Jul 18, 2013)

Is that a disembodied random steering wheel on the windshield?


----------



## cptkid (Jul 18, 2013)

One word 

BLERGHHHHH 

(that's the sound of me vomiting when I look at selective colour)


----------



## Overread (Jul 18, 2013)

Selective colour is like HDR - lots of people do it badly and, for some reason, it also sparks pangs of pure anger in other photographers when they see it done badly (oddly they get more angry about these than they do missed focus, blurry shots, colour casts, etc...). It's one of those things where the dislike of it is almost just as much of a fad within one social group as the use of the method is a fad within another and part of the "hate" is social groupings disliking each other (ie "pure" photographers disliking the "newbies" who are not "true photographers").


----------



## Benco (Jul 18, 2013)

Selective colour notwithstanding I'd say that your photo is a bit crowded, needs more room each side of the car. My take on selective colour is that I've never seen it done in a way that was appealing, it could possibly, maybe work in some abstract setting by a photographer who really knew their stuff.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 18, 2013)

You may want to let that guy know that his passenger side headlight is out.


----------



## amolitor (Jul 18, 2013)

Selective coloring is a cliche, but people like it, and they like it for an excellent reason: It works like crazy.

You can use selective saturation, where you boost the saturation on the thing that's interesting, and lower it on everything else, to a surprising degree before people will notice it as an effect, though. It's nearly as effective, and people won't yell at you for a tasteless newbie. Best to be pretty careful about exactly what you choose to emphasize, though. It's easy to create visual confusion by emphasizing the wrong thing.


----------



## KenC (Jul 18, 2013)

amolitor said:


> This ^^^!!  I would add that IMO selective saturation is preferable because it doesn't distract the viewer from what you want to emphasize.  The effect, just like the effect from selective contrast or sharpening, is subtle and makes the viewer look at a certain part of the image without hitting him/her over the head with the effect.  In the case of selective coloring, the first thing the viewer thinks is "look at that, only one thing is in color."  An obvious vignette draws a similar reaction, and I can't see why a photographer would want this to be the first thing the viewer thinks about, even if that viewer can get past the cliche aspect, which many cannot.


----------



## Ilovemycam (Jul 18, 2013)

OP, they are fine.

I would do a few if I knew how to do them. That is part of my goal for this year to learn more PP. 

Photogs devoid a photo of color or hype it up with HDR. So nothing wrong with selective color. It is just part of the mix.

Do what you love...nice pix!


----------



## manaheim (Jul 18, 2013)

Derrel said:


> When *Adobe Photodeluxe* was the amateur image editing/manipulation software of choice for amateurs, back in the late 1990's, selective color was one of the hot, new "special effects". The roots of the disdain for selective color date back to around that time...when wedding shooters would take a bridal photo with the bride holding her bouquet--with the bouquet in glorious, resplendent full color, and the bride in God-awful B&W tones. A year or two later, hordes of weekend warrior baby photographers were ripping off Anne Geddes, and dressing babies in huge "daisy" and "chrysanthemum" costumes, with you guessed it--black and white baby faces surrounded by huge, stupid-looking colored fake flower blossoms.
> 
> So, the roots of selective color being a newbie "Oh-wow-sooooo-kewl,man!" kind of effect go way back to the early days of digital cameras. It has never, ever overcome the stigma.
> 
> Selective color is the mullet hairstyle of the photo world. Selective color is the wife-beater and a 16-ounce can of Hamms beer of the underclass. Selective color is the hitch-hiking to see your girlfriend at the womens prison of white trash society. Selective color is the ________________ of ______________.



I have nothing better to say on the topic than what Derrel said but I wanted to add a +1 to the "yeah, no, don't" pile.

It probably can be done without being cheesy, but I have yet to see it accomplished.


----------



## runnah (Jul 18, 2013)

manaheim said:


> It probably can be done without being cheesy, but I have yet to see it accomplished.



It has been done for years successfully in graphic novels. The whole Sin City movie was brilliant in this case.

Of course both of those mediums are done by very talented artists, not hacky photographers.


----------



## manaheim (Jul 18, 2013)

Both interesting examples, though not photography.  Sin City is closer, I suppose.

I think what happens with photography is people do it without thinking through what it means to do it... they just think "Oh this will be cool!"  In Derrel's examples, what does it say when the bride is b/w and the bouquet is colorful?  The bouquet is more important?  The bouquet is alive and the bride is dead?  Most of the pictures along these lines suffer from this same problem.

Even using that thought process, I've yet to see a picture where I thought selective coloring would enhance the image.  Usually I feel like it's just a distraction.


----------



## PixelRabbit (Jul 18, 2013)

IIRC last autumn(ish) someone posted a selective colour of the orange leaves in a landscape and it was done quite well and was fairly well received, I will have to see if I can track it down.


----------



## kathyt (Jul 18, 2013)

It is kinda like really tight perms from the 80's, only a VERY selected few can get away with it! I was not one of them, and NO I will not show pictures.


----------



## KmH (Jul 18, 2013)

It's a passenger car that has been modified for racing.

In many race cars the steering wheel has to be removed so the driver can get in and out of the car.

It looks like the passenger side headlight has been modified with an air duct for the engine, oil cooler, brakes, etc.

As mentioned, a major issue with the posted photo are all the reflections seen on the car.

Tip: Use a high quality CPL filter.


----------



## Dagwood56 (Jul 18, 2013)

Derrel said:


> When *Adobe Photodeluxe* was the amateur image editing/manipulation software of choice for amateurs, back in the late 1990's, selective color was one of the hot, new "special effects". The roots of the disdain for selective color date back to around that time...when wedding shooters would take a bridal photo with the bride holding her bouquet--with the bouquet in glorious, resplendent full color, and the bride in God-awful B&W tones. A year or two later, hordes of weekend warrior baby photographers were ripping off Anne Geddes, and dressing babies in huge "daisy" and "chrysanthemum" costumes, with you guessed it--black and white baby faces surrounded by huge, stupid-looking colored fake flower blossoms.
> 
> So, the roots of selective color being a newbie "Oh-wow-sooooo-kewl,man!" kind of effect go way back to the early days of digital cameras. It has never, ever overcome the stigma.
> 
> Selective color is the mullet hairstyle of the photo world. Selective color is the wife-beater and a 16-ounce can of Hamms beer of the underclass. Selective color is the hitch-hiking to see your girlfriend at the womens prison of white trash society. Selective color is the ________________ of ______________.



^^^DITTO^^^


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

Gavjenks said:


> Is that a disembodied random steering wheel on the windshield?



Ha it is indeed...tim is a bigger guy thats the only way he can Dukes of hazard his way out of the car lol


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

@ Runnah

Side note....Jeremy Clarkson in the Ariel Atom is the greatest car video ever lol


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

Thank you for all the great responses.....Its nice to see people can be critical but polite at the same time. This was one of 2 selective photos I have done, and I agree with all critique on it, the reflections do considerably mess with the image and I can see how it would be considered crowded.


----------



## runnah (Jul 18, 2013)

BanditPhotographyNW said:


> @ Runnah
> 
> Side note....Jeremy Clarkson in the Ariel Atom is the greatest car video ever lol



It's not the Atom, its from this season the BAC car.


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

runnah said:


> BanditPhotographyNW said:
> 
> 
> > @ Runnah
> ...



Nice!! I havn't seen that yet. Is it better than the atom? The gif you have looks very similar to the atom lol


----------



## Ilovemycam (Jul 18, 2013)

OP, if you aspire to be a commercial photog, then you must know various techniques to please your client. If you went into the lengthy discourse as to why selective color is crap, as was mentioned in this thread, what would your client think? 

They pay the bills, you just do the grunt work. You must give the client what they want.

People put down my hyper-real HDR color work all the time. I love it and I have put many of them in museums and prestigious rare book libraries. So I don't care if others hate them. As long as I am happy with my work that is all that counts.

Check out a couple of my hyper-real shots with a Google image search.

_'Pole dancer Ross County Ohio'
_
_'Carla and babydoll'
_
Where would I be if I listened to the HDR haters? Both of these and a bunch more are in public collections in the US and U.K. OK, maybe my old BW from the 70's opened the door. But still, HDR street is what I am about now and it has to stand on its own. 

_"Be daring, be different, be impractical, be anything that will assert integrity of purpose and imaginative vision against the play-it-safers, the creatures of the commonplace, the slaves of the ordinary." _&#8211; Cecil Beaton

A lot of the photogs on the forums seem to think that just because they devoid a photo of all color and make it BW or freak it out with grunge HDR that makes it great. The shot has to be good to start with, then you fine tune it to improve. But you have to start with something and then perfect it.

Sure, my work is not for all comers. But we can only offer what is in us to give. We can build upon it and try new things to see how it works out. 

"When I was on trips I used to put Polaroid&#8217;s in a container with sea water, sand and pebbles. I&#8217;d swirl it all around to get scratches. It&#8217;s this random element that I call &#8216;the drip&#8217;. It&#8217;s the drip which might splash onto the other side of the canvas when you&#8217;re working on a painting and make you think &#8216;that is good&#8217;, possibly leading you to explore other things. My whole life is spent in search of the drip; it can change everything. " &#8211; David Bailey

When I get around to it I will learn how to do selective color. Nothing may come out of it, but it looks fun. If we quit before we start, we will get nowhere. As Winogrand tell us..._the more I do, the more i do_. So even if I get no 'keepers' from selective color it may help in some unknown area.

_"I just take pictures and hope something comes out of it."- _Elliott Erwitt 

If I was you OP, I would do lots more selective color until you know it inside and out and have had your fill.

&#8220;Never give up, don&#8217;t listen to the haters. Don&#8217;t try to be an artist unless you can work and live in isolation, without any thanks. Bleak advice, but needed until you get to the much lauded place. &#8220; - Scape Martinez - Impact interview March 23, 2009


----------



## manaheim (Jul 18, 2013)

"hyper-real" HDR?  Real is sort of binary.  It either is or isn't.  In my experience, very few people complain about the more "real" looking HDRs. They complain about the crazy over-the-top highly-saturated ones.  Which category are you in, really?

And I'd like to point out that in one sentence you said, "They pay the bills, you just do the grunt work. You must give the client what they want." and then you said "People put down my hyper-real HDR color work all the time. I love it and I have put many of them in museums and prestigious rare book libraries. So I don't care if others hate them. As long as I am happy with my work that is all that counts."

So which is it? If your clients didn't like your "hyper-real" style, would you put your opinions aside and give them what they want, or do what you're happy with?

I dunno.  You just seem sort of all over the map, and you're sort of puffing out your chest with the thing about you being in museums and... rare book libraries???


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

I think what Ilovemycam meant by those statements was completely separate of each other. The first statement was about paid work the other about passion. I agree paid work should be all about the customer but personal work should only matter to you. I happen to not be a very unbiased person and can find good in just about anything even if its a widely hated subject. I like both of those HDRs by the way though the stripper is kind of disturbing lol


----------



## JacaRanda (Jul 18, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Selective color is the mullet hairstyle of the photo world. Selective color is the wife-beater and a 16-ounce can of Hamms beer of the underclass. Selective color is the hitch-hiking to see your girlfriend at the womens prison of white trash society. Selective color is the ________________ of ______________.



Love the Hamms beer reference.  Takes me back to the good old days when I developed the taste for beer at the ripe young age of (way too young)!  I have not seen a can since moving from the Midwest in the 70's.  I miss the commercials. :cry:


----------



## mishele (Jul 18, 2013)

I see next months photo challenge theme...hehe


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 18, 2013)

JacaRanda said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Selective color is the mullet hairstyle of the photo world. Selective color is the wife-beater and a 16-ounce can of Hamms beer of the underclass. Selective color is the hitch-hiking to see your girlfriend at the womens prison of white trash society. Selective color is the ________________ of ______________.
> ...



Ha we have Hamms all over out here and Ranier too


----------



## amolitor (Jul 18, 2013)

Congratulations on placing your work in museums, ilovemycam. Mere weeks ago it seemed that you'd had no luck at all with that!


----------



## cynicaster (Jul 19, 2013)

Selective color is to digital photography what hammer pants are to fashion.  

Oh, and you can't touch dis.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 19, 2013)

manaheim said:


> "hyper-real" HDR? Real is sort of binary. It either is or isn't. In my experience, very few people complain about the more "real" looking HDRs. They complain about the crazy over-the-top highly-saturated ones. Which category are you in, really?
> 
> And I'd like to point out that in one sentence you said, "They pay the bills, you just do the grunt work. You must give the client what they want." and then you said "People put down my hyper-real HDR color work all the time. I love it and I have put many of them in museums and prestigious rare book libraries. So I don't care if others hate them. As long as I am happy with my work that is all that counts."
> 
> ...



i vote for chest puffing.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 19, 2013)

12sndsgood said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > "hyper-real" HDR? Real is sort of binary. It either is or isn't. In my experience, very few people complain about the more "real" looking HDRs. They complain about the crazy over-the-top highly-saturated ones. Which category are you in, really?
> ...



^Ditto! Especially after seeing the images! Heck, some people consider the "Dogs Shooting Pool" image to be art... so I guess someone might think those were art?


----------



## slow231 (Jul 21, 2013)

cgipson1 said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > manaheim said:
> ...



i'm not a huge fan of the particular shots that ilovemycam referenced either... but i think his/her post is spot on and relevant.  do what you like, i wouldn't put too much stress on being a TPF hero. i mean unless you find the quality of the work here just utterly mind blowing, truly consider the weight of the opinion here (at least with respect to producing shots that YOU naturally find important).  in the end what really is the value of a homogenized perspective of some internet forum? it's bound to be a bit of a compromise of many styles, and most importantly it's probably a good bit divorced from your own vision.  

that said there is a value in cc and exploring what others think, but take it in perspective with what YOU think.


----------



## krystalynnephoto (Jul 21, 2013)

I do not and never have liked selective coloring.  It looks cheap and unprofessional to me, and frankly, I get shocked to see how many people still like it.  But I'm also a fan of everyone using their own "vision."  So, whatever floats your boat.


----------



## gsgary (Jul 22, 2013)

BanditPhotographyNW said:


> @ Runnah
> 
> Side note....Jeremy Clarkson in the Ariel Atom is the greatest car video ever lol



.Jeremy Clarkson is the biggest prick going, you know he was banned from driving ? for drink driving


----------



## Overread (Jul 22, 2013)

gsgary said:


> BanditPhotographyNW said:
> 
> 
> > @ Runnah
> ...



But he's the only entertaining thing left on the Telly, besides re-runs of Attenborough


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 22, 2013)

gsgary said:


> BanditPhotographyNW said:
> 
> 
> > @ Runnah
> ...



I'd still kick it with him....The U.K. (and pretty much most civilized countries for that matter) have much stricter DUI laws than the good old U.S. of A here....I think its because the government in the U.K. may actually want their people the stay alive.


----------



## gsgary (Jul 22, 2013)

BanditPhotographyNW said:


> I'd still kick it with him....The U.K. (and pretty much most civilized countries for that matter) have much stricter DUI laws than the good old U.S. of A here....I think its because the government in the U.K. may actually want their people the stay alive.



The bloke is a knob i wouldnt give him the time of day


----------



## bentcountershaft (Jul 22, 2013)

I'm anti selective color and anti Clarkson.  He's just so damn condescending.


----------



## Robbo521 (Jul 22, 2013)

if it makes me money i will do it for them.i have been asked to do selective coloring on some pictures.i dont care for it but if they paying,dont matter to me.​


----------



## peter27 (Jul 23, 2013)

It has become something of a cliché but, per se, selective colour isn't a bad thing, and, done well, it can still be very effective.


----------



## manaheim (Jul 23, 2013)

5 pages of the same comments. .. ugh. The pain...


----------



## amolitor (Jul 23, 2013)

manaheim said:


> 5 pages of the same comments. .. ugh. The pain...



Where are my monkeys?
WHERE ARE MY MONKEYS!!!?


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 23, 2013)

well..personally speaking, I have never been a fan of B&W, and I don't think either shooting in, or converting to B&W works for very many pictures at all. (this is of course, the same opinion many people have on selective coloring)
and yet, gsgary and the_traveler have shown me that sometimes, I just have to push through my natural prejudice against B&W and admit that a photo is in fact, just plain well executed. 

my point is...just because something has become a cliche, or has been vastly overdone, (and usually poorly) does NOT mean someone cannot use that technique to produce a good image. if your going to throw selective coloring out the window due to misuse, you should toss sun flare out as well. and brick wall backgrounds. and train tracks. and desaturated images. and dutch tilts. and vignetting.  and, well, you get the idea.


----------



## amolitor (Jul 23, 2013)

And when all those things are thrown out, a sort of photographic perfection is achieved:

MONKEY PICTURES.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 23, 2013)

amolitor said:


> And when all those things are thrown out, a sort of photographic perfection is achieved:
> 
> MONKEY PICTURES.



well, who doesn't love monkey pictures?


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 23, 2013)

I don't like monkeys....they throw poop at me.....lol


----------



## KenC (Jul 23, 2013)

TPF is more fun than a barrel of monkeys, no wait, TPF is a barrel of monkeys ...


----------



## gsgary (Jul 23, 2013)

Overread said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > BanditPhotographyNW said:
> ...




You have got to be joking Top Gear is trash


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 23, 2013)

gsgary said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...



And yet its the #1 most watched show on the planet......Though the last couple seasons have sucked pretty bad....


----------



## manaheim (Jul 23, 2013)

die thread, die.


----------



## manaheim (Jul 23, 2013)

I swear this one looks like my dad.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 23, 2013)

BanditPhotographyNW said:


> And yet its the #1 most watched show on the planet..



Can you cite that please? I hadn't heard that before.


----------



## BanditPhotographyNW (Jul 24, 2013)

Well I will have to slightly rephrase it...Top gear is the Most widely watched factual TV program according to Guinness Book
Top Gear drives its way into into Guinness World Records 2013 edition - September - 2012 - Latest World Record News | Guinness World Records


----------



## IByte (Jul 24, 2013)

PixelRabbit said:


> IIRC last autumn(ish) someone posted a selective colour of the orange leaves in a landscape and it was done quite well and was fairly well received, I will have to see if I can track it down.



There was also another one where an old coffee can was red and the cabin was B&W.....the search is on.


----------



## terri (Jul 24, 2013)

Well, this thread has hopefully given the OP enough opinions to help him come to his own conclusions - and has since gone meandering off track.   

Closed.


----------

