#3 for me. The colors just “pop” more for me, and the detail seems clearer. I assume this is for an HDR discussion or tutorial?

–John

I must say #1, in #3 the collors “pop” just too much for me. ;0)

There is a balance between producing what the photog/artist likes and what the targeted audience prefers. Sometimes I produce what I like with total disregard to anyone else thinks and that is a valid image. More often we need to find a personal balance between our style and a commercial product, another totally valid image.

So long as we feel creatively satiated and remain financially buoyant all is good:)

For me, it’s a toss-up between #1 and #3, and I eventually went for #3 because of the additional depth on the floor.

My dear Scott, Hi

As Lisa said, It depends on the taste. This is my Choice 1 ….. I think in this shot Color is the Key and as you can see the second Photo is a little bit Desaturate. There is no perfect details in outside and the contrast is not good. In the third Image Color is Exaggerated with very high Contrast. First Image is the Winner, Congratulation :D

Best Wishes

-Ali

#2 for me (if I had to chose)

In #1, the inside is relatively ‘accurate’ while the people outside look processed and sort of look wrong in the overall context
In #2, both inside and out are obviously processed, and while not subtle it seems to suit
In #3, both inside and out are way over processed for my liking, but have seen plenty of postcards in this style!

#1 looks more natural, especially looking out the windows. The other two look like they forgot to clean the windows. What a dive!! My wife would not let us eat there because of the windows :)

I like #1 because it leads the eye better to the people outside which are the focus of the picture (for me).

I like #1 the most. Im not really into those over the top HDR pictures. I like HDR when it enhances the normal look :)

wow, 3 project is a cooler, brighter colors are more visible.

I like #1…just personal preference…will be curious to see how much opinions vary.

Yep definitely drawn more to #1 … it just looks more ‘natural’ and more like what I would have seen…if that sense. #3 to me screams Photomatix … not that I’m slating it or anything ;)

Looking forward to ‘hearing’ the reason behind this.
Regards,
Glyn

#3 is a bit overdone, although agree if painterly/stylistic HDR is the goal, then this is it.

Really can’t decide between #1 and #2, but #2 seems more natural, specially the scene outside the door. The mountains and water are too defined in #1.

#2 for me.

#1 looks less manipulated (or more natural, whichever you prefer), and I dislike the bright frames which appear on the inside of windows in #2 and #3.

# 1 looks more natural than others.

#1 gets my vote. Although all three are ‘over’ in my taste, #1 looks more ‘believable’ and gives the best inside/outside lighting balance (I would even have lightened up the outdoor areas, closer to what they look in #2).

#2 runs over is micro contrast, #3 is way over in saturation and color boost.

1 for sure. HDR has been overdone for years. 1 shows a reasonably realistic view with all the benefits of HDR in terms of expanded dynamic range without the over the top realism.

I like #1 best overall as it appears the most (relatively) realistic of the 3, but I prefer #3 where the wall meets the ceiling. #1 and #2 appear to be glowing on the join.

The chairs look took fake in #2 and the mountains aren’t as bold. In #3 the halo is off putting, so I’d say #1 is best because it looks like they are all trying to be realistic but only #1 succeeds, if you were to do an even more extreme overly processed one, that could give a different feel and genera, so could work.

No 1 for me as it looks more natural. For me this sort of image looks better as a subtle HDR image.

For me it’s the first one. It is most natural looking. 2 and 3 are to much HDR in my opinion.

I’m also gonna go with #1. Out of the three, it’s the one that made me look at it and say “is this hdr or real”? The other two were just a little too hdr for my taste. Even found #2 to be a little washed out. But I gotta say that for me, it’s the color of the chairs that had the last word. I love the dark green they have in #1.

I voted for #1 because it is the one that has the least amount of “Glow” in the furniture and floors. It would seem to me that #1 is the closest representation to what I might see that scene if I were standing at that doorway/window.

If I had a choice though I would take it one step further and take just the white walls of image #3, except for the halo around the painting and blend them with all the rest of the elements of image #1. For some reason it just seems that the wall and ceiling in #1 are a little too contrasty while #3 has a more pleasing (again without the halo around the painting).

On their own, #2 has more haloing than I would like to see and comes across as more grungy that I think I would see if I stood looking at the scene in person and #3 looks more like something I would expect to see from a Bert Monroy painting.

I guess for my taste, I do not like haloing and I don’t like it when solid objects that wouldn’t appear iridescent if you were viewing the scene live do in the photo. I think it is almost the equivalent of a portrait taken in IR B&W… it just doesn’t look right to my eyes.

Of the three I would pick #1. Mostly because it is the most realistic of the three. Has a little more contrast and the shine is less.

I went with 1 because it has more of a “painterly” feel to it. I think it has the right amount of saturation and contrast. The interior in 1 is slightly darker than in 2, which looks more natural.

Personally, I can’t stand 3. To me, it looks like someone tried to mask in a darker exposure of the doorway and the floor in front of door and did a terrible job of it. Because light is coming through the doorway, the area directly in front of the door should be the brightest part of the floor. Instead it’s too dark and the entire doorway and floor area has that grayness from using an underexposed shot. Also, the doorway was masked in but the windows weren’t? It just looks sloppy.

I like #1 the best. HDR processes are so heavily applied in all cases that I think you might as well go whole hog and smooth out the imperfections (for example in the ceiling and the door) as well to get a true cartoon feel to it. Like other commenters have said, the other two choices just seem dirty.

I liked number 1 the best because it seemed less over the top of the 3. I like HDR’s though so I’m not playing the hater. :)

At a guess, #1 Photoshop, #2 Photomatix, #3 NIK?

I voted for #3. The interior of the cafe seems lighter giving more of the scene to look at and explore.

Scott, I would say that all three exhibit what was once considered blatant over-sharpening. The result is that of images that look conspicuously contrived and artificial. However, if I had to choose which is the least objectionable, it would be number 1 because it seems to have a trace of normal foreground to distant ground lighting. I wonder how many out-of-gamut colors Photoshop would detect before you tried to print anyone of them?

I actually like the texture better in #2. However, I voted for #1 because the skyline outside the door seemed the most natural to me. I don’t really care for the overly hazy (glowy) look in #3. Though, obviously its a very subjective call.

I voted #3. I thought the shot was all about the empty interior, but when I got to #3, my eyes suddenly snapped to the people eating outside, and that now became the subject. It spoke to me about why the room was empty, because it was so beautiful outside. Looking back at the other two after that, I barely notice the people outside.

I think #1 is it for me.

I choose #2 for a couple of reasons. While each photo has its pros and cons #2 gives me the light balance that I like. The portrait on the back wall is darker which is less distracting. I would like if the sky wasn’t so washed out though. And ready… the lens distortion on the front doors on 1 and 3 bothers me.

#1

I would be nice if people would simply READ before they insist to WRITE so much…

“Now, if you don’t like any of them—no problem (it won’t affect what this is about), just skip the poll altogether. Many thanks—Scott”