# Saturated, Desaturated



## Sarmad (Jan 4, 2015)

After this desaturated photo of a flower got quite some (unexpected) hype , thought I should share it with you guys .




Flower by Sarmad8bit, on Flickr




Desaturated Flower by Sarmad8bit, on Flickr


----------



## orionmystery (Jan 6, 2015)

I actually prefer the desaturated version better as I can see details on the petals.


----------



## JustJazzie (Jan 6, 2015)

Really beautiful hues here! I prefer the saturated version.


----------



## Zen1300 (Jan 6, 2015)

I'm kind of split between the two.   Nice!


----------



## KenC (Jan 7, 2015)

The saturated version actually is a bit oversaturated and some are reacting to the fact that oversaturation causes loss of detail.  When the colors are pushed to the limit of the color space, you lose color variation, which along with texture is part of "detail."


----------



## SquarePeg (Jan 7, 2015)

I much prefer the desaturated version.  Thanks for sharing.


----------



## sm4him (Jan 7, 2015)

So which one, in the OP's opinion, is actually closest to the "real" color of the flowers?
I also prefer the desaturated version, but suspect that what I'd REALLY prefer is something in between the two.


----------



## Sarmad (Jan 7, 2015)

Actually the "saturated" version is SOOC except for a little crop in lightroom.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 7, 2015)

Go with what you like best.  It's your visual interpretation unless you simply just what to capture what's out there.

With that said, I like the desaturated version out of the two


----------



## KenC (Jan 7, 2015)

Sarmad said:


> Actually the "saturated" version is SOOC except for a little crop in lightroom.



SOOC doesn't mean unmanipulated, it just means that the software defaults (probably in-camera) have been used to create the jpg image.  I find that it's not uncommon for the defaults to lead to oversaturation.


----------



## Sarmad (Jan 8, 2015)

KenC said:


> Sarmad said:
> 
> 
> > Actually the "saturated" version is SOOC except for a little crop in lightroom.
> ...



yeah I think that might be it, I myself was a little surprised when I saw the photos in computer first, maybe I had used something like picture style or auto contrast/brightness fix in my camera (Canon). But I don't remember.

Btw what is your opinion about default picture styles and auto contrast corrections built in the camera? Should one use them or just leave them to auto, shoot raw and make adjustments in the post?


----------



## KenC (Jan 8, 2015)

Everyone has to find their own process.  I shoot raw and convert in DPP using either "standard" or "faithful" defaults, usually the latter if there are some intense colors or contrast because the former often boosts saturation and contrast too much.  I don't usually process more than about one image out of every six or seven, so this works for me.  If you convert a higher percentage then either some automated process or shooting jpg may work better for you, although the latter needs to be done with full awareness of its limitations.


----------



## Sarmad (Jan 9, 2015)

KenC said:


> Everyone has to find their own process.  I shoot raw and convert in DPP using either "standard" or "faithful" defaults, usually the latter if there are some intense colors or contrast because the former often boosts saturation and contrast too much.  I don't usually process more than about one image out of every six or seven, so this works for me.  If you convert a higher percentage then either some automated process or shooting jpg may work better for you, although the latter needs to be done with full awareness of its limitations.



Well I am a noob in post processing so all I do is that I open the image in lightroom and make adjustments with all sliders till I get desired image. But now I am learning with time a lot. I recently learned how to reduce noise created by sharpen tool in lightroom. I used to leave the masking process because I thought that is just "reverse" of sharpening so what's the point in sharpening the image you just sharpened. But I used to see the noise in images upon high magnification and i searched about that and found that masking will do the trick and it will only sharpen the edges and leave the areas which don't need sharpening. Then I thought my images could have been much better if I had learned that before. Then I learned about how the aperture affects sharpness at low f numbers, then I learned about focus stacking, then "burning and dodging". I guess there's always room for learning and it is a long way to go till I get over my post skills.


----------



## FITBMX (Jan 9, 2015)

I am not a very good at all! But, I know plants and flowers. #1 looks much more natural. #2 doesn't look  natural at all.
So me I'm for number 1!


----------

