Took this shot this past weekend and liked how it turned out. Can't decide which I like better between the normal version or the selective saturation one. Any thoughts on the differences or the photo itself? Thanks!

Normal:


Sel. Sat.:


And here's another photo I took that I liked:

 

Hmmmm, I think the selective saturation looks somewhat funny. The rocks look like they're volcano rocks, and the plants look like they're dying.

 

Normal all the way, grey foilage just does not look right. Selective sat should be used to enhance objects in photos with animated elements or people. The waterfall photo you have posted does not fit this criteria.

 

To me, selective saturation enhances something that already stood out, even in the fully saturated version - just making it pop that much more. In your example, the water almost blends in with the desaturated portion.

 

What camera are you using?

 

Spot color does not work for organics IMO.

 

Thanks all, I see what you're saying. FSTS2K: These were shot with a Sony a700 w/ 70-200mm f/2.8G for the waterfall photo and Carl Zeiss 16-80mm for the cats eye.

I tried the selective saturation because I like the look. Here's a few others that I did a while back:

 

Now those are better. I like the P&S one.

Nice to see a fellow Alpha shooter!! (a700 here too)

 

The second batch posted is what i suggested do in my post above well except for the last shot of the S. some nice pics there Just be careful you dont get hooked on just one style of pp its easy to overuse something and get in a rut.

 

i swear iv'e seen that P&S shot somewhere. mabye on your flickr page? still cool none the less , like the flower one too