Cathy :) #32893

Of course, Lawrence. That is why I introduced the photo as I did. I have done several projects similar to this, that people have doubted were even a photograph. Maybe this looks like a creation that was assembled in PS or CorelDraw, but it is not. It is a photograph of a blue ball on neon colored paper. If you ever get a chance, take a photograph of something flourescent...overexpose 1/2 to 1 full stop...and you will see for yourself how brilliant the color is. Flourescents seeem to emit their own light. The ball is lit by a flashlight to give it a strong 3-D effect, No photoshop there. I used PS to punch up the color and did some spotting, which is really no different than submitting it to a Color Lab and telling them to enhance the colors just as I have done here. How about the photographer who uses velvia film to produce "unrealistic" green grass and brilliant blue skies? Maybe we should make up a new catch phrase. "Natural color, No VF" (velvia film).

Lem, you make a good point. Here at Betterphoto, I would imagine that more photos than not use some sort of processing to enhance the image. More specifically, you will likely find that the winning photos are digitally processed at an even higher rate. #32926