Photo #10159: Plebejus argus

27.08.2011 14:30, Peter Khramov

Moved to argus. As for retouching, there should be some limits. For instance, paphia shots are definitely too "art" and not real. Such intense colors as you can see on this shot are rather usual and even default for some digital cameras. Even though for this very photo author did it manually. As for "art" sections and the idea in general, let's look at this on the other hand. I think, we lack better organized system of shot features, say, with common such as "underside", "top", "photo of alive (or dry) butterfly/moth", and user's, like "strictly art stuff" or "trip to Magadan", whatever. And these user's features should be available to choose for everybody, so as everyone could complect his own shot set using all these features...

27.08.2011 12:49, Evgeny Komarov

I'd suggest Plebejus argus what shot author roughly retouched with hue/saturation tool and got as a result red orange instead of yellow, light blue at the main part of a hind wing instead of gray etc. I used to blunder like this at the beginning of my practicing digital photography. By the way, that would be good to note that for authors uploading their shots not to use such hard "beauty" retouching what intensely changes object's colors. There are other websites for such stuff. Vasily told about it commenting Laothoe sp. shot in black and white. If needed, there can be "art" section at the website image gallery to add there these confusing though beauty things hard to identify.