A friend and I were looking at an image of these high Sierra Nevada Mountain flowers and discussing how the flowers might be presented in Post Processing. I thought that discussion to be very helpful as I learn more about various presentations of an image--especially of floral images.
So, I selected one nice image of these high mountain flowers, fairly contrasty in RAW and processed in three different levels--each of which I liked.
However, the images give a different "feeling" or "notion" about the flowers, and I have to consider how this works.

The flowers, leaves, and background were not "fixed" in any way; they are left exactly in the way nature has damaged or altered them, as to their physical characteristics--wounds, scratches, bug marks, etc.
The only changes made (other than cropping off unnecessary edges) were the adjustment of contrast and brightness.
I used the layers / masks available in Affinity Photo (similar to Photoshop) to increase over-all contrast and brightness, via "Levels".
Then I used "Curves" to adjust contrast of only the blossoms.
I thought of this as doing make-up on a young beautiful actress in three different levels:
* Normal daily walk-about or casual office dress -- (De-hazing or enhancing the colors and contrasts by removing the RAW mid-tones).
* Enhancing natural beauty to the lady for purposes of a nice lunch with friends -- (bringing up eye shadows and eye liners and brightening cheeks by increasing contrast to the blossoms from base to tips of petals).
* Makeup for stage appearance -- (significantly deepening the eye shadows, increasing the eye-liners and deepening the cheek colors and contrasts--done by painting on various levels of contrast to individual parts of the blooms--various contrasts by several different masks of curves).

Each of these has its own appeal, so not one is "better" than the other in my opinion. But, if I may ask this, I would like comments about what each image produces or "feels like" to the viewer. I'm trying to learn to visualize what I want when I work on an image in post.
Thanks much for any input!
Angky.

[MikeNArk]

I believe that you have visualized it well. Each image is a progressive upgrade in style/glamor as imagined in your narrative. The added contrast makes the details more and more distinct. More than I would normally do but a good exercise in creating certain looks.

[angkymac]

I believe that you have visualized it well. Each image is a progressive upgrade in style/glamor as imagined in your narrative. The added contrast makes the details more and more distinct. More than I would normally do but a good exercise in creating certain looks.

Thank you, Mike!
That is a helpful perspective for me to consider. Helps to clarify my thoughts and ability to visualize accurately.
Angky.

[ToddK]

I like your way of describing the processing and the results. In my personal taste, I like the contrast and saturation of flowers in the third image, but I like the less saturated background in the first image just to make them the star of the show.

[angkymac]

I like your way of describing the processing and the results. In my personal taste, I like the contrast and saturation of flowers in the third image, but I like the less saturated background in the first image just to make them the star of the show.

Hmmm.... Good observation that I hadn't paid much attention too--the background saturation's effects between 1 and 3.
Glad you pointed it out!
Thanks, Todd!
Angky.