Originally I gave this photo a 5-star because I thought I could do cool things with the color of the train and buildings, but it really wasn't as easy as I thought. Anyway, I did:

• Curves adjustment on the clouds to make some cloud visible
• Apply LUT adjustment on the cloud to add color
• Applied +30% saturation to get a bit more life out of the train
• cropped ofc
• The usual lens/camera corrections, built into the Develop Assistant
• I also applied double classic chrome LUT in the beginning but my family said the original looked better bc of the purple building. Agreed, so I went back to remove the chrome and emphasise existing color.

What do you think? What could I have done better?

Edit: I used Affinity by Canva

Tried to emulate the look of the classic Cinestill 800T film stock digitally.

Taken near Tofino, March 2025

Hi! Made this photo on late walk with friend, not so sure about white balance: is blue-ish better or yellow one as on the spot?

first time brave to post this pls help me critique

My first go at using photoshop - I’m a video editor but wanted to take a go at editing a photo since I have access to a very nice lens! Any and all critique welcome! I basically just masked the two parts of the moon and played with the sliders!

Taken some advice to down shadow and make more blacks tone.. (so shadow not so bright)

And make it more cyan.

2nd edit shadow and blacks adjustment was done sky and surrounding building and water and sky was no change from the before.

3rd edit shadow and blacks adjustment was done on both sky and surrounding building and water

A venue I shot recently had the worst lighting I have run across in a long time. And I did not handle it well. It seems like all of their LED were set to 100% saturation. This image is almost 100% blue and magenta. If anyone wants to take a crack at it, I can upload the RAW.

RAW Image

Hi all! I was hoping to get some feedback or suggestions about better editing this portrait.

In particular I’m having trouble with some color casts due to the foliage, the sun bouncing off fake grass, and the method of bronzer application. Generally it looks too orange in my opinion, but if adjust the color balance cooler my person turns purple.

This photo was made while were filming an interview for a documentary, so I was unable to use a flash or any modifiers beyond what the video team was using. They had a pizza box reflecting some fill on her face but no lights. Their shot looked really good so I’m at a loss why mine is having trouble.

I was lucky enough to be offered an helicopter ride above Mexico City, but as luck would have it, there was a heavy smog that day. I had to be heavy handed with the post processing and spent so much time trying to get something out these foggy photos that I don't even know in the end if the photo looks nice. Add to that fact that I was not very experimented with my camera at the time. Any advice here?

Photo was shot with a Pentax KX and a 18-55mm lens at f3.5 1/320sec ISO200

Recent portrait session at a park in Atlanta. Wanted to practice using fill flash during the day time, so I shot this with an off camera godox v1. My main edits were cropping to 4:3, s shape tone curve, desaturated greens, sky replacement (was blown out originally), and added grain. Curious to hear everyone’s thoughts!

My IG is https://www.instagram.com/__braxtonmoore and website https://www.braxtonmoore.com/ if anyone would like to see more work

Thought it was great thru the view finder and then not so good when I took it off my camera nearly binned it and then cropped in and loved it, still maybe a little dark in places.

Critique welcome

All my gear was packed away, luckily my a6400 was within reach but still missed most the fun.

Photoshops Camera Raw Editor has received a new glow slider in its newest update and I used it to give the raw file a much more dreamy look. I’m aware this might be way too much for a lot of people but I really love the results and had tons of fun with the new glow effect :D

You can see the whole editing process in the video here (with the raw files to test it) https://youtu.be/ly6pUpzXWYc

1. Basic Adjustments

First,  I merged an HDR out of 5 different exposures since I wanted to have nice details in the brightest and darkest parts of the image. After that, I brought up the exposure, shadows and blacks to make the base image brighter. To not blow out the sky I dropped the highlights a bit. For stronger colors vibrance was added.

Also, I added some texture to give details more sharpness. At the same time I brought down clarity and dehaze to give the image a dreamy look. Here is where I also added a global glow effect through the new glow slider. Its important to set the glow style to bloom for a softer effect.

1. Masking

Then, a radial gradient was added over the bright spot in the sky. Here, I brought up the blacks reduced the dehaze and added a little more glow to make the effect stronger in that spot.

Using a linear gradient I brought up the contrast in the foreground making it look a bit clearer. I also targeted the water itself using a landscape mask and adde clarity and texture to it.

1. Color grading

In the color mixer I slightly brought down the yellow hue since I prefer the warmer orange tones. I also raised the blue saturation slightly. Using some split toning I added a very saturated warm tone to the highligthts and a colder color to the mid tones.

Hi! I have an Epson v850, have always used it for scanning 120 film and 4x5, and got fairly good results.

I'm now scanning a lot of 35mm film as I've owned my Leica MP for about 18 months, and I'm just not that happy with the results. I can get it most of the way there in post processing with some colour noise cancellation and sharpening etc, but the original file or conversion is a bit of a mess tbh, and needs a fair amount of work to make it any good.

Basically, is this just a scanner issue, are flatbeds just pretty useless at scanning 35 without a fair amount of post?

At the moment I'm scanning in Silverfast 8, and in terms of digital noise, getting better results from the RAW DNG conversion in NLP, which it is obviously designed for. Above I've given three separate examples with a photo of my Dad getting his hair cut in the street in France this summer ha. One with the Silverfast NegaFix conversion, then a TIFF with iSRD converted in NLP, and finally RAW DNG converted in NLP.

NegaFix settings are set to the correct film stock (Portra 800), 48 Bit, TIFF, 3200ppi, haven't touched any picture settings, Gamma 2.2, CCR is on, iSRD is on auto, and thats it!

Then when exporting for NLP as a TIFF to be able to use iSRD, I'm obviously scanning a positive, 48 Bit, TIFF, 3200ppi, haven't touched any picture settings, Gamma 2.2, iSRD is on auto.

And finally for the RAW DNG, positive scan, 48 Bit HDR RAW, DNG, 3200ppi, haven't touched any picture settings, Gamma 2.2!

NLP settings have been kept very basic here for the comparison. For both I colour balanced from the film border, then opened NLP, used Frontier, Kodak Portra, and LINEAR, and then did a basic white balance and tint adjustment, which I kept consistent on both conversions for a direct comparison here.

Above I've attached the conversions, which I haven't touched yet, and also a 200% crop so you can see the colour noise. I've then also done a quick grade and clean up on all three.

Colour wise, straight out of the conversion, I'm getting best results from the RAW DNG conversion in NLP, however with a bit clean up the two TIFFs are also usable. To my eye after some colour and clean up, I'm getting best results from the iSRD TIFF version, which is great, as this is by far my preference! You can see way more colour contrast in this version especially in the reds of the barber pole, one way sign, and the purple hat. Also more teal tones in the cooler areas, and way better greens. The RAW DNG just looks way flatter to me. I could have definitely done a better grade on the RAW DNG, but I wanted to keep it simple by just using the basic controls. As mentioned, I've also applied some sharpening and colour noise clean up on all three versions.

Has anyone else experienced similar results as I have here?

Is there anything that I'm missing in my workflow?

Would I get much better results in terms of noise and colour from something like a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED with upgraded SA-21, so that it can scan full rolls. Just wondering if anyone has experience with this scanner?

which one is better?
1. original 2. and 3 are edited .