depends on taste. i find it on the same level as cross processing, texture is not lost yet unlike certain HDR software processing. usually i look at the texture as the threshold point between life-like versus painting-like pictures. suitability of hues and saturation are also factors i would consider. loss/addition of texture, unnatural hues and over-saturation would be what i find as too fake.
but i forgot to mention that pic 1 is rather disappointing as compared to the rest. i realise that the highlights of the sun must be controlled right from the start, and if it is blown, it is better left blown with highlights graduating outwards. otherwise there will be bad banding. a fairly defined edge can be seen between white and the adjacent colors without sufficient smooth transition. the bright portions also fade too abruptly into pitch dark shadows.
hope you dun mind the harsh comments. i'm also learning too. do disagree and share if you have your thoughts.
zoossh, actually I agreed what you think of the #1 image, and really appreaciate your comments, because this is the fastest way for me to learn and improve, infact got people said before my photos like rubbish, haha..I still can take it:bsmilie:
No worries, even if you can't get the info. Thanks for the effort
Regardless of gender (I look at the end result), I agree with zoosh that your photos are good!
er...er...actually I'm a person very lazy to ps, that's why i like to shot in film and slide, if you think is fake may be is because of the scanning of slide too contrast, pardon of my lousy scanner, if got the chance I can let you see the original slide, the color even better. Anyway thanks for viewing