>>9909900>This one looks over editedI agree with this part
>but it needs a bit more brightness, especially his face.But I disagree with this part.
If you have an extremely bright background (like lightning flashing), it makes sense to have an object in the foreground look darker. That's how a camera in auto mode will realistically capture it anyway, because it will adjust the ISO, f-stop, etc. to compensate for the bright light and everything else will get darker as a result.
>>9908086 isn't perfect, but it's by far the better of the two IMO. And his face has just the right amount of shadow, it looks dark and mysterious but you can still make out his eye peering out from under his hair. It's a nice dramatic shot with a good feel of tension.
>>9909736 ruins just about everything I liked about it. It is worse in every way, and I am not being hyperbolic. The drama is gone from his face, the lighting scheme is bland and awful, you have brightened him so much that the grain and JPEG artifacts are leaping out at me, it's oversharpened, and it looks artifical and plasticky and weird, even for a toy.
In most cases, less is more when editing. There is nothing worse than an overly photoshopped mess. Learn restraint early on and you'll be fine.
