Swallowtail

[Anita Bower]

This is a great summer for Swallowtails.
I know this image is very saturated, which may not be to everyone's liking. Not sure how I feel about it. I'm experimenting.
Nikon D300, Sigma 105mm macro, f5, 1/200 sec., ISO 125, handheld.

[Diane Miller]

Wonderful!! It's not too saturated for me! I love the OOF flower in the BG, and the butterfly is so sharp and detailed!

If you're concerned about the saturation, the issue might really be one of brightness in the greens at the base. You could experiment with a gradient there with a slight darkening. It might balance the weight of the butterfly a little more.

[Anita Bower]

Wonderful!! It's not too saturated for me! I love the OOF flower in the BG, and the butterfly is so sharp and detailed!

If you're concerned about the saturation, the issue might really be one of brightness in the greens at the base. You could experiment with a gradient there with a slight darkening. It might balance the weight of the butterfly a little more.

Thanks, Diane. I like the saturation, and am glad to know you do too. I've done very little with the gradient tool, so don't quite know how to do what you suggest, but, I like the image as it is.

[Arthur Morris]

Wow I love this one. The soft look and pastel colors. The image design. And the killer sweet BKGR. The BKGR flower. You are learning fast.

[christopher galeski]

Beautiful image Anita,love the colors,love the BG,well done.

[Jonathan Ashton]

Hi Anita, I like the image but for me quite a bit too saturated, and in parts a little burnt out - the stamens and anthers in the primary flower head, I also sense there is some red reflected off the flower into the butterfly due to the high saturation, otherwise I doubt it would be significant. The OOF greens are unnatural to my eye. Sorry if I come across as too boring/traditional :S3:

[Norm Dulak]

Very nice, Anita. The subject, color, composition and sharpness where appropriate are all excellent.

[Anita Bower]

I thank all of your for commenting on my image. I always want your honest appraisal, which I think I get. I much prefer to know what you don't like rather than not getting any comment. I'm glad some of you like this saturated image. That is reassuring. Jonathan--nothing to apologize for. I assumed you would not go for it, and that is perfectly OK. I think we are all able to appreciate and respect styles that differ from ours. :-)

[Steve Maxson]

Hi Anita. You are getting really good at this! The butterfly gave you a great pose and I love the positioning of the two flowers in the frame, the soft background, and the low shooting angle. The colors are beautiful, but the saturation is too high for them to be considered "realistic." If this was mine (me being pretty much of an in-the-box kind of guy) I would probably reduce the saturation levels - and end up with a more realistic look, but a much less striking image than what you produced. :S3: This is very nicely done!

[Diane Miller]

I just pulled this image into PS and I see that the embedded profile is AdobeRGB. People with non-fully-color-managed browsers will be seeing it with incorrect colors because those browsers will be assuming it is sRGB when it isn't, AND people who pull it into PS with color management not set properly to warn them of profile mismatches between the image and their working space will also be seeing the colors incorrectly.

Daniel Cadieux gave information about how to set things up correctly in another thread, and I added a brief summary for those who might feel the links Dan gave are a lot to get through. See this link:
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/113153-Lady-Leopard-Luck?p=931781#post931781

Anita, if you will convert (not "assign") the image to sRGB (and check the box to embed the profile) and then re-export it and re-post, people should be seeing it as you intend. I wonder if the people who feel it is too saturated will then change their minds? I see the saturation as lovely, and not overdone.

PS -- those who then see a difference in the two posts should do the simple steps in that link. And be aware that if you do set PS color management correctly, it sometimes un-sets it, for no apparent reason. It has done this for years and apparently still is.

[Anita Bower]

I just pulled this image into PS and I see that the embedded profile is AdobeRGB. People with non-fully-color-managed browsers will be seeing it with incorrect colors because those browsers will be assuming it is sRGB when it isn't, AND people who pull it into PS with color management not set properly to warn them of profile mismatches between the image and their working space will also be seeing the colors incorrectly.

Daniel Cadieux gave information about how to set things up correctly in another thread, and I added a brief summary for those who might feel the links Dan gave are a lot to get through. See this link:
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/113153-Lady-Leopard-Luck?p=931781#post931781

Anita, if you will convert (not "assign") the image to sRGB (and check the box to embed the profile) and then re-export it and re-post, people should be seeing it as you intend. I wonder if the people who feel it is too saturated will then change their minds? I see the saturation as lovely, and not overdone.

PS -- those who then see a difference in the two posts should do the simple steps in that link. And be aware that if you do set PS color management correctly, it sometimes un-sets it, for no apparent reason. It has done this for years and apparently still is.
Diane:
You make a good point, and one I hadn't thought of. I had RGB selected because I just sent off a bunch of images to be printed. I need to use the selection that enables me to select sRGB or RGB. I'm posting the image again. I think it is now sRGB.

[Diane Miller]

The repost is still tagged AdobeRGB.

If you are exporting from PS, do Save for Web and choose the JPEG option -- it will flatten layers and resize as you specify in the dialog box. Be sure to check "convert to sRGB" and to "embed the profile." That should do it.

This image is so "yummy"! It deserves to be seen correctly by everyone!

[Mitch Carucci]

I love the bright pastel colors of this image. Beautiful swallowtail!

[Anita Bower]

Thank you, Mitch!

[Anita Bower]

Diane: I really appreciate the effort you are making to help me understand how to post an sRGB photo. Your last explanation was good. I followed it. I'm posting the result. I hope I got it to be sRGB. If so, I've learned a valuable lesson. Many, many thanks!!!!!!!!

[Diane Miller]

Uh... no. Not there yet. this one does not have an embedded profile and is displaying in a color-managed browser as much less saturated, indicating that you did something to the image other than just tagging (after converting to) a profile. If you assigned sRGB to an image that was in AdobeRGB, that isn't the right thing to do.

What PS are you using? Elements (which version), CS-whatever.....?? LR??

The original post was delicious!! We've gotta get this right!

[Diane Miller]

The issue of people who are using a non-color-managed browser (and seeing it incorrectly) is a separate problem. And nothing you can do about it. Just like nothing you can do about people who view it on a badly calibrated monitior. But if you have a working file (your master file) in a medium- to wide-gamut working space in PS (AdobeRGB is medium and good for printing) and you have optimized it to your liking with a reasonably calibrated monitor, then all you can do to ensure that most people will see it correctly in their browser is to CONVERT it to sRGB and then save the JPEG to post.

BUT -- leave your master file in AdobeRGB. sRGB is a lower gamut and you will sacrifice some colors, in the interest of displaying it more accurately on more monitors and browsers. Just convert to sRGB and then save or export the JPEG (which will also be flattened and 8 bit)-- don't save the master file that way.

Stay with me here -- I'm a bulldog who has latched onto a tug-of-war toy. Won't let go until you have it right!!

[Diane Miller]

Here's a simple (and eye-opening) demonstration of how non-color-managed browsers see an image. It was posted a year ago so the information may not be be completely current. Color management is something that is still in flux with many browsers. I wish the 6 illustrations were bigger but you can get the idea. It also mentions the important factor of how the browser interacts (or doesn't) with the monitor profile, which should be set up by a calibration and profiling utility.

http://petapixel.com/2012/06/25/is-your-browser-color-managed/

There is a lot more information on this subject on the internet.

I realize some people will see this as getting off-topic. I don't think it is, in light of the above conversation, but I'll leave it at this.

[Anita Bower]

I finally figured out how to change from Adobe RGB to sRGB in Elements 10. The command "Convert Color Profile" is under "Image." Here is the sRGB version.

[Diane Miller]

Yes!! You got it now!

A quick web search shows there is a "Save for Web" in Elements (same as in PS) that will do all the work for you, for exporting an image for web use. And the settings should be sticky -- once you set them as desired. Of course, desired size may vary from one export to another.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmUvnuAnPH4