Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Great taste, or less filling?  (Read 5298 times)
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« on: September 15, 2007, 03:00:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm torn between the color and B&W versions of this photo:

[attachment=3253:attachment] [attachment=3254:attachment]

C&C on the photo itself welcome as usual, but your color/BW preference and why you like one or the other would be appreciated.
Logged

wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5744



WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2007, 06:53:59 PM »
ReplyReply

My $0.02 would be that the strengths of this photo are more in the tones and textures, shapes and shadows.  I don't think the colour adds anything so I'd go with the B&W.

Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2007, 06:56:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Definitely the color one.  The B&W one has so much fine detail with a fairly narrow range of brightnesses for most of it that it looks visually messy, hard to tell one thing from another.  The color makes it more coherent, easier to parse, for the eye and brain.

I would have preferred an image with a couple of isolated trees, though.  The solid band of trees makes the eye wander in search of a focal point, which it never finds.

Lisa
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2007, 08:35:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you. Interesting that it's split evenly so far. Anyone else care to jump in?
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7962



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2007, 09:03:54 AM »
ReplyReply

I hate to disagree with Lisa       , but I prefer the B&W. The color doesn't seem to add anything for me.

In either one, I would like to see the shadows opened up a little bit more. At least on the web (and of course I always use the web to examine MF and LF images       ), I can't get into the shadows as I would like.

Now let's have someone else put in a vote for the color.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
wolfnowl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5744



WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2007, 01:20:54 PM »
ReplyReply

So, Lisa... PC or Mac?  

Just kidding!!!!


Mike.
Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.
~ Jean Cooke ~


My Flickr site / Random Thoughts and Other Meanderings at M&M's Musings
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2007, 03:01:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Univac, of course...
Logged

Digiteyesed
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 159


WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2007, 03:48:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Would I get in trouble for saying that I'm not overly enamored with either image? Both versions just seem to lack...impact...to me. Sorry, and no disrespect intended.
Logged

Neutral Hills Stills
A visual journey through this unique area of East Central Alberta, Canada.
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2227



WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2007, 07:11:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Like the color, but it's not essencial to the image to me - love the BW!
Logged

Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2007, 09:49:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So, Lisa... PC or Mac?

Give me a unix workstation with a good sys admin!  (Yes, I'm weird.)  Unless I'm doing photo processing (since Gimp isn't ready for prime time) or web surfing, in which case I'll grit my teeth and reluctantly deal with a PC...

Lisa

P.S.  Perhaps I should clarify for Jonathan - I still prefer the color one, but I don't think either version is up to your usual standards.  Just not as interesting as many past ones of yours.
Logged

Jack Varney
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 392


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2007, 10:23:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Normally I prefer B&W but here I like the color. The reflections come alive in the color by comparison and the color version has a greater sense of three diminsionality or depth.
Logged

Jack Varney
alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 675



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2007, 02:09:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Definitly the B&W version but the contrast bothers me.  The highlights are just too strong.
Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2007, 04:23:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Alain, are you referring to the tree trunks?
Logged

alainbriot
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 675



WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2007, 04:55:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Alain, are you referring to the tree trunks?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=141071\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Essentially, because they are the largest area of highlights, but the other highlight areas are also too bright for me.

It's an issue of contrast.  Basically: too much contrast.  I can't tell if it comes from the light conditions or the processing.  Light can be harsh, but it can be toned down through processing or through HDR.  On the other hand contrast can be over-increased in processing resulting in harsh lighting effects, such as what I see in your image. Certain types of sharpening can do that as well, in particular USM because it works on the edges of objects, reinforcing the contrast essentially, which could very well have resulted in the excessive contrast here.  

What's interesting about excessive contrast is that it is bothersome in small areas (such as the outline of objects) as well as in large areas (such as the tree trunks). That is because our eyes go to the areas of highest contrast first when looking at an image.  When several areas have high contrast, our eye keeps jumping from one area to the next, making the image very tiring to look at. That is how I feel with this image (B&W version).  Fixing the contrast problem is the first step in working towards an image that we can then evaluate for further work.  Until that is done there is little that can be done about deciding "what else to do" because the contrast prevents a deeper analysis of the image.
Logged

Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2007, 05:13:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Gut response.  Neither speak to me.  Is that snow on the trees? Frost? what season is it?  I am kind of a jumble about the shots.

I agree with the person who said it isn't as good as your stuff normally is.  (that is coming from a lurker)
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
jpjespersen
Guest
« Reply #15 on: September 21, 2007, 09:32:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Neither.
Try going back when the light is actually good.  This image doesn't deserve one second of thought.  In fact it should have been deleted while looking at it on the digi cam.  Of course this is just my opinion, not meant to offend.

http://www.JPJespersen.com
« Last Edit: September 21, 2007, 09:32:20 PM by jpjespersen » Logged
I CHNGE
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2007, 04:02:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Neither.
Try going back when the light is actually good.  This image doesn't deserve one second of thought.  In fact it should have been deleted while looking at it on the digi cam. Of course this is just my opinion, not meant to offend.


Couldn't have said it better myself...

The photos on your WebSite are far more interesting...both the color and B&W hurt my eyes...

The subject is boring unless the image is to document the degradation of a once pristine pond and it's surrounding landscape for a Newprint or Tabloid article...

My 0.02 and not meant to offend either, though you are thick skinned enough to begin with...
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3427



WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 01, 2007, 01:56:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I find these images surprising from you Jonathan as they look like badly oversharpened images from a low res point and shoot. Not at all what I would expect after reading your posts.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
Fred Ragland
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2007, 02:14:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I find these images surprising from you Jonathan...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=143205\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
We all have our off days.  I suspect you came to us with these images on one of those days.  

You have done some truly excellent work.  I'm thinking of your Texas images from south of San Antonio.  Show us your best and let us help make it better.

Best wishes,

Fred
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad