>>4494087
Kenrockwell.com for tutorials.

File: B7QQwgDCUAI5oYr.jpg (162 KB, 1024x976)

162 KB JPG

>>4494088
Thank you, anon. But why do half of this guys photos look like this?

>>4494091
That's just his stylized artwork. Notice the skillful color balance. If you dig a little deeper you'll see less stylized pieces of art he has masterfully created.

>>4494091
he was 100 years ahead of his time in 1999 and he's still 100 years ahead of his time today.

but seriously, what do you mean you have no idea? like technical aspects of the program you're using? plenty of autists make youtube tutorials for ever program under the sun to understand the basics. or do you mean you don't know what's "right?" because there is no right or wrong beyond what you (or your client) want from the image. your OP image for instance doesn't seem to have an obvious color cast and the contrast seems reasonable, which means you're doing fine for 95%+ of applications where you'd be taking a photo imo. if you or your client want a specific look its mostly about defining that look and making it consistent between images, which aside from controlling things in camera to create consistency is basically just a matter of finding a look you or the client like and then (honestly probably through a lot of trial and error initially) bringing the images you're going to use in line with that look.

if you're talking video I'm clueless so maybe someone else can answer as to that

if it looks good to you thats what matters
dont pay for some hack youtubers edit colors

>>4494087
>I have no idea what I'm doing.
Good. The first and last word on editing and color grading is "the eye is the final judge."