Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Coe, Aug 11, 2012.

  1. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:42:26 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    wrote:
    : In article <2012081009003039063-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
    : says...
    : > The creation of an image such as "The Tetons and The Snake River" is
    : > something that was beyond the capabilities of photographers of his time.
    : > <
    : > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Adams_The_Tetons_and_the_Snake_River.jpg
    : > >
    :
    : Hmmm... nowadays you would use HDR to create such an image, or overlay
    : manually images taken with different exposures.
    : By the way, 5:4 aspect ratio.

    Even without HDR, there are photographers alive today (the Duck himself may be
    one of them) who could do a better job than Adams did with that scene. But
    that's not the point; after all, with today's equipment, Adams would have done
    a better job. The point is that Adams was a genius at choosing the right
    conditions (vantage point, time of day, film and print processing, etc.) and
    using the resulting images to help elevate landscape photography beyond the
    see-and-shoot mentality of the past. The Snake River shot is easy to criticize
    for its murky shadows and inconsistent lighting, but you can see at a glance
    the impact it must have had as a harbinger of the future of American landscape
    photography.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 11, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 10:35:41 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-08-11 09:40:16 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:42:26 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    >> wrote:
    >> : In article <2012081009003039063-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
    >> : says...
    >> : > The creation of an image such as "The Tetons and The Snake River" is
    >> : > something that was beyond the capabilities of photographers of his time.
    >> : > <
    >> : >
    >> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Adams_The_Tetons_and_the_Snake_River.jpg

    >:
    >>
    >> > >

    >> :
    >> : Hmmm... nowadays you would use HDR to create such an image, or overlay
    >> : manually images taken with different exposures.
    >> : By the way, 5:4 aspect ratio.
    >>
    >> Even without HDR, there are photographers alive today (the Duck himself may be
    >> one of them)

    >
    >Aaw! Shucks!
    >Just for that here is a biggie (downsized to 1604x1080), too downsized
    >and it kinda kills it.
    >No HDR, just some zone work with NIK Silver Efex Pro 2.
    >BTW: It is Geo-tagged. ;-)
    >< http://db.tt/pOdGzYUC >


    Look, Duck, I admire a great deal of your work. You do some nice
    stuff. But, sometimes you get carried away with effects. Whatever
    NIK did to this one is too much.



    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 11, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 12:40:16 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:42:26 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    >wrote:
    >: In article <2012081009003039063-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
    >: says...
    >: > The creation of an image such as "The Tetons and The Snake River" is
    >: > something that was beyond the capabilities of photographers of his time.
    >: > <
    >: > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Adams_The_Tetons_and_the_Snake_River.jpg
    >: > >
    >:
    >: Hmmm... nowadays you would use HDR to create such an image, or overlay
    >: manually images taken with different exposures.
    >: By the way, 5:4 aspect ratio.
    >
    >Even without HDR, there are photographers alive today (the Duck himself may be
    >one of them) who could do a better job than Adams did with that scene. But
    >that's not the point; after all, with today's equipment, Adams would have done
    >a better job. The point is that Adams was a genius at choosing the right
    >conditions (vantage point, time of day, film and print processing, etc.) and
    >using the resulting images to help elevate landscape photography beyond the
    >see-and-shoot mentality of the past. The Snake River shot is easy to criticize
    >for its murky shadows and inconsistent lighting, but you can see at a glance
    >the impact it must have had as a harbinger of the future of American landscape
    >photography.
    >

    It's like Henry Ford. Carmakers today crank out better looking,
    better made, and better equipped automobiles. But, you have to
    consider Ford for what he was doing when he did it compared to what
    others were able to do.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 11, 2012
    #3
  4. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 13:34:03 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-08-11 13:09:15 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 10:35:41 -0700, Savageduck
    >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-08-11 09:40:16 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:42:26 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    >>>> wrote:
    >>>> : In article <2012081009003039063-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
    >>>> : says...
    >>>> : > The creation of an image such as "The Tetons and The Snake River" is
    >>>> : > something that was beyond the capabilities of photographers of his time.
    >>>> : > <
    >>>> : >
    >>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Adams_The_Tetons_and_the_Snake_River.jpg

    >:
    >
    >
    >:
    >:
    >>>>
    >>>> Hmmm... nowadays you would use HDR to create such an image, or overlay
    >>>> : manually images taken with different exposures.
    >>>> : By the way, 5:4 aspect ratio.
    >>>>
    >>>> Even without HDR, there are photographers alive today (the Duck himself may be
    >>>> one of them)
    >>>
    >>> Aaw! Shucks!
    >>> Just for that here is a biggie (downsized to 1604x1080), too downsized
    >>> and it kinda kills it.
    >>> No HDR, just some zone work with NIK Silver Efex Pro 2.
    >>> BTW: It is Geo-tagged. ;-)
    >>> < http://db.tt/pOdGzYUC >

    >>
    >> Look, Duck, I admire a great deal of your work. You do some nice
    >> stuff.

    >
    >>

    >Glad you like it. ;-)
    >
    >> But, sometimes you get carried away with effects. Whatever
    >> NIK did to this one is too much.

    >
    >No effects. What effect is it you believe I used?
    >It is a single exposure, no HDR or tone mapping.
    >
    >The metadata/exif is intact, you might even notice that it was shot
    >using that critically panned lens, the Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR.
    >
    >ACR processing of the NEF, Lens profile applied, a bit of noise
    >reduction in the sky, contrast tweak, USM applied, and NIK Silver Efex
    >Pro 2 for the B&W conversion. Some selective B&W adjustment with SE,
    >and done.


    Using NIK to convert from color to black and white *is* an effect.
    Any conversion is an effect.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 11, 2012
    #4
  5. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:24:05 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-08-11 13:39:49 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    :
    : > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 13:34:03 -0700, Savageduck
    : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : >
    : >> On 2012-08-11 13:09:15 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    : >>
    : >>> Look, Duck, I admire a great deal of your work. You do some nice
    : >>> stuff.
    : >>
    : >>>
    : >> Glad you like it. ;-)
    : >>
    : >>> But, sometimes you get carried away with effects. Whatever
    : >>> NIK did to this one is too much.
    : >>
    : >> No effects. What effect is it you believe I used?
    : >> It is a single exposure, no HDR or tone mapping.
    : >>
    : >> The metadata/exif is intact, you might even notice that it was shot
    : >> using that critically panned lens, the Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR.
    : >>
    : >> ACR processing of the NEF, Lens profile applied, a bit of noise
    : >> reduction in the sky, contrast tweak, USM applied, and NIK Silver Efex
    : >> Pro 2 for the B&W conversion. Some selective B&W adjustment with SE,
    : >> and done.
    : >
    : > Using NIK to convert from color to black and white *is* an effect.
    : > Any conversion is an effect.
    :
    : OK! I didn't have a view camera, or a Hassy loaded with B&W film with
    : me on that trip, so I shot in digital RAW which required a B&W
    : conversion, so I could feed my Adams flight of fantasy.
    :
    : Curses! I had to convert the RAW NEF to JPEG, and a conversion equates
    : to an effect. I'm doomed!
    :
    : ...and I know NIK Silver Efex Pro even implies "effects" in its name.
    :
    : So what should I do to reach, MY desired result, when you seem to
    : prefer me to show an image with no adjustment?
    : Shoot JPEG only (no conversion, therefore no effect. I guess that's
    : right) and just post that unadjusted image?

    It might be interesting to see what it looks like in color. The excessive
    contrast down the middle might be mitigated by the deeply wooded portions
    being dark green, rather than black.

    Note that history doesn't record that Adams was opposed to color. But color
    prints lacked the permanence of B&W, and the effects Adams wanted weren't
    always well supported by the color films of the time. Most importantly, color
    film didn't lend itself well to the hands-on tinkering that characterized so
    much of Adams's work. Which is why the insinuation that he might have eschewed
    today's industrial-strength photo editors is so silly.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 11, 2012
    #5
  6. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:24:05 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2012-08-11 13:39:49 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 13:34:03 -0700, Savageduck
    >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2012-08-11 13:09:15 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 10:35:41 -0700, Savageduck
    >>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On 2012-08-11 09:40:16 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:42:26 +0200, Alfred Molon <>
    >>>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>> : In article <2012081009003039063-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
    >>>>>> : says...
    >>>>>> : > The creation of an image such as "The Tetons and The Snake River" is
    >>>>>> : > something that was beyond the capabilities of photographers of his time.
    >>>>>> : > <
    >>>>>> : >
    >>>>>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Adams_The_Tetons_and_the_Snake_River.jpg

    >:
    >
    >
    >:
    >:
    >
    >Hmmm...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> nowadays you would use HDR to create such an image, or overlay
    >>>>>> : manually images taken with different exposures.
    >>>>>> : By the way, 5:4 aspect ratio.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Even without HDR, there are photographers alive today (the Duck himself may be
    >>>>>> one of them)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Aaw! Shucks!
    >>>>> Just for that here is a biggie (downsized to 1604x1080), too downsized
    >>>>> and it kinda kills it.
    >>>>> No HDR, just some zone work with NIK Silver Efex Pro 2.
    >>>>> BTW: It is Geo-tagged. ;-)
    >>>>> < http://db.tt/pOdGzYUC >
    >>>>
    >>>> Look, Duck, I admire a great deal of your work. You do some nice
    >>>> stuff.
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>> Glad you like it. ;-)
    >>>
    >>>> But, sometimes you get carried away with effects. Whatever
    >>>> NIK did to this one is too much.
    >>>
    >>> No effects. What effect is it you believe I used?
    >>> It is a single exposure, no HDR or tone mapping.
    >>>
    >>> The metadata/exif is intact, you might even notice that it was shot
    >>> using that critically panned lens, the Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 VR.
    >>>
    >>> ACR processing of the NEF, Lens profile applied, a bit of noise
    >>> reduction in the sky, contrast tweak, USM applied, and NIK Silver Efex
    >>> Pro 2 for the B&W conversion. Some selective B&W adjustment with SE,
    >>> and done.

    >>
    >> Using NIK to convert from color to black and white *is* an effect.
    >> Any conversion is an effect.

    >
    >OK! I didn't have a view camera, or a Hassy loaded with B&W film with
    >me on that trip, so I shot in digital RAW which required a B&W
    >conversion, so I could feed my Adams flight of fantasy.
    >
    >Curses! I had to convert the RAW NEF to JPEG, and a conversion equates
    >to an effect. I'm doomed!
    >
    >...and I know NIK Silver Efex Pro even implies "effects" in its name.
    >
    >So what should I do to reach, MY desired result, when you seem to
    >prefer me to show an image with no adjustment?
    >Shoot JPEG only (no conversion, therefore no effect. I guess that's
    >right) and just post that unadjusted image?


    Look, I recognize that you - as I do - process your images to look the
    way you like them to look. I don't have a problem with that. I just
    don't like the (what I call) over-processed look. When you "contrast
    tweak" or make a "selective B&W adjustment", that's adding effects.
    It's about how much tweak or how much adjustment.

    I did a trial run with NIK Silver Efex Pro a couple of years ago, and
    it seems I remember some pre-set versions to choose from. Some I
    liked. They weren't different enough from my own conversions, but
    they sure were simpler.

    As you know, I don't do landscape. I do like a lot of contrast,
    though, with people:
    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Candids/i-DsvRSR3/0/X2/2011-02-07-1-X2.jpg

    This is as close as I get to landscape:

    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/i-32HcHJF/0/X2/2012-05-10-1G-X2.jpg
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 12, 2012
    #6
  7. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:58:37 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >> Look, I recognize that you - as I do - process your images to look the
    >> way you like them to look. I don't have a problem with that. I just
    >> don't like the (what I call) over-processed look. When you "contrast
    >> tweak" or make a "selective B&W adjustment", that's adding effects.
    >> It's about how much tweak or how much adjustment.

    >
    >OK!
    >I have been using their stuff for a few years now, and I am constantly
    >learning to control my hand, and follow tutorials.
    >
    >> I did a trial run with NIK Silver Efex Pro a couple of years ago, and
    >> it seems I remember some pre-set versions to choose from. Some I
    >> liked. They weren't different enough from my own conversions, but
    >> they sure were simpler.

    >
    >Yup the presets can make thing a bit faster, but they are not
    >necessarily the best choice, but a starting point for further
    >adjustments, to the point where you can save those settings as a new
    >preset. Then there is the ability to make selective adjustments with
    >either a control point, or brushing in adjustments to areas needing
    >them. This is where the Wacom tablet comes into its own.
    >
    >> As you know, I don't do landscape. I do like a lot of contrast,
    >> though, with people:
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Candids/i-DsvRSR3/0/X2/2011-02-07-1-X2.jpg

    >
    >Aah! Yes, I remember the dude with the diamond stud. nice work.
    >
    >>
    >> This is as close as I get to landscape:
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/i-32HcHJF/0/X2/2012-05-10-1G-X2.jpg

    >
    >Now
    >>

    >here there is something "wrong". The contrast due to the strong
    >highlights (I suspect blown highlights in the color version) needs
    >something else to fix the image. I don't believe there is a quick NIK
    >fix for this. I think that this is one of those times an ND Grad might
    >have helped. Perhaps adding a grad in ACR???
    >
    >Was there a particular reason you went B&W with this, or was it a
    >rescue effort?


    No, I saw it as black and white from the start. I liked the lines and
    the diagonals of the shadows. I was out and about and saw this in
    early morning with the sun behind the trees. I pushed it to max
    contrast deliberately. I didn't want detail.

    I wouldn't have shot it for a color image. I don't really remember
    the original.

    >Why do I think there might have been CA issues through the tree tops.


    I wouldn't have worried about any CA because I wasn't interested in
    any details in the leafy portions and expected any fringing to drop
    out.




    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 12, 2012
    #7
  8. Robert Coe

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/11/2012 7:22 PM, tony cooper wrote:

    <snip>
    >
    > As you know, I don't do landscape. I do like a lot of contrast,
    > though, with people:
    > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Candids/i-DsvRSR3/0/X2/2011-02-07-1-X2.jpg
    >

    He reminds me of someone who I played piker with a few months ago. ;-)


    > This is as close as I get to landscape:
    >
    > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/i-32HcHJF/0/X2/2012-05-10-1G-X2.jpg
    >


    Nothing wrong with that one. You might do well if you stopped saying you
    don't do landscapes.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Aug 12, 2012
    #8
  9. Robert Coe

    PeterN Guest

    On 8/11/2012 9:04 PM, PeterN wrote:
    > On 8/11/2012 7:22 PM, tony cooper wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >>
    >> As you know, I don't do landscape. I do like a lot of contrast,
    >> though, with people:
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Candids/i-DsvRSR3/0/X2/2011-02-07-1-X2.jpg
    >>
    >>

    > He reminds me of someone who I played piker with a few months ago. ;-)
    >
    >
    >> This is as close as I get to landscape:
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/i-32HcHJF/0/X2/2012-05-10-1G-X2.jpg
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Nothing wrong with that one. You might do well if you stopped saying you
    > don't do landscapes.
    >


    There goes my dyslexic fingers again.
    That should be "poker," not "Piker."



    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Aug 12, 2012
    #9
  10. Robert Coe

    Bruce Guest

    Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >Folks lock themselves into what they believe those long dead legends
    >might, or might not do based on personal beliefs and myths.



    "Folks" does not exclude you, of course. ;-)
    Bruce, Aug 12, 2012
    #10
  11. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 20:31:20 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-08-11 17:20:48 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    :
    : > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:58:37 -0700, Savageduck
    : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : >
    : >> Now here there is something "wrong". The contrast due to the strong
    : >> highlights (I suspect blown highlights in the color version) needs
    : >> something else to fix the image. I don't believe there is a quick NIK
    : >> fix for this. I think that this is one of those times an ND Grad might
    : >> have helped. Perhaps adding a grad in ACR???
    : >>
    : >> Was there a particular reason you went B&W with this, or was it a
    : >> rescue effort?
    : >
    : > No, I saw it as black and white from the start. I liked the lines and
    : > the diagonals of the shadows. I was out and about and saw this in
    : > early morning with the sun behind the trees. I pushed it to max
    : > contrast deliberately. I didn't want detail.
    : >
    : > I wouldn't have shot it for a color image. I don't really remember
    : > the original.
    : >
    : >> Why do I think there might have been CA issues through the tree tops.
    : >
    : > I wouldn't have worried about any CA because I wasn't interested in
    : > any details in the leafy portions and expected any fringing to drop
    : > out.
    :
    : Alright then! Shot with B&W in mind from the start, so CA not an issue.
    : I just feel that it could be done a little differently from the
    : original RAW, it still feels like something of a "rescue" to me.
    :
    : What I like is, unlike many others, you are prepared to step out of
    : your comfort zone and shoot for experimentation.
    : It can be fun.
    :
    : I know this is not your high contrast line of trees with the Sun behind
    : them, but is this vaguely the sort of thing you had in mind?
    : < http://db.tt/FGtA4wYe >

    I like Tony's trees better.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 12, 2012
    #11
  12. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 05:30:34 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-08-12 05:23:40 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    :
    : > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 20:31:20 -0700, Savageduck
    : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : > : On 2012-08-11 17:20:48 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    : > :
    : > : > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:58:37 -0700, Savageduck
    : > : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : > : >
    : > : >> Now here there is something "wrong". The contrast due to the strong
    : > : >> highlights (I suspect blown highlights in the color version) needs
    : > : >> something else to fix the image. I don't believe there is a quick NIK
    : > : >> fix for this. I think that this is one of those times an ND Grad might
    : > : >> have helped. Perhaps adding a grad in ACR???
    : > : >>
    : > : >> Was there a particular reason you went B&W with this, or was it a
    : > : >> rescue effort?
    : > : >
    : > : > No, I saw it as black and white from the start. I liked the lines and
    : > : > the diagonals of the shadows. I was out and about and saw this in
    : > : > early morning with the sun behind the trees. I pushed it to max
    : > : > contrast deliberately. I didn't want detail.
    : > : >
    : > : > I wouldn't have shot it for a color image. I don't really remember
    : > : > the original.
    : > : >
    : > : >> Why do I think there might have been CA issues through the tree tops.
    : > : >
    : > : > I wouldn't have worried about any CA because I wasn't interested in
    : > : > any details in the leafy portions and expected any fringing to drop
    : > : > out.
    : > :
    : > : Alright then! Shot with B&W in mind from the start, so CA not an issue.
    : > : I just feel that it could be done a little differently from the
    : > : original RAW, it still feels like something of a "rescue" to me.
    : > :
    : > : What I like is, unlike many others, you are prepared to step out of
    : > : your comfort zone and shoot for experimentation.
    : > : It can be fun.
    : > :
    : > : I know this is not your high contrast line of trees with the Sun behind
    : > : them, but is this vaguely the sort of thing you had in mind?
    : > : < http://db.tt/FGtA4wYe >
    : >
    : > I like Tony's trees better.
    : >
    : > Bob
    :
    : Come on! They both suck.

    Well.... Of the two, I prefer Tony's. I admit that the packing peanuts all
    over the ground don't help it any, but the overall composition isn't bad.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 12, 2012
    #12
  13. Robert Coe

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:32:44 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-08-11 15:20:11 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    :
    : > It might be interesting to see what [the Duck's Half Dome shot] looks like
    : > in color. The excessive contrast down the middle might be mitigated by the
    : > deeply wooded portions being dark green, rather than black.
    :
    : OK!
    : Here is a color version and a side-by-side comparison.
    : < http://db.tt/ZVjYoasQ >
    : < http://db.tt/Rz16bwMj >

    I'm ambivalent. The color version cures the excessive contrast (without
    imparting much green, which is OK), but the lack of the yellow-filter effect
    of the B&W conversion leaves an overall hazy look and a sky that's lighter
    than ideal. Given the apparent angle of the sun, maybe a polarizer would have
    helped. But of course that kind of second guessing doesn't change the picture.

    If I had taken the picture (in Canon RAW mode) and were editing it with DPP,
    I'd try landscape mode to try to darken the sky. And maybe up the auto
    lighting adjustment from normal to high. I have no idea what those tweaks
    translate to in the Nikon or Photoshoppe worlds.

    The bottom line is that I think I do prefer the color version, but not by as
    much as I might have expected.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, Aug 12, 2012
    #13
  14. Robert Coe

    tony cooper Guest

    On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 09:40:46 -0400, Robert Coe <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 05:30:34 -0700, Savageduck
    ><savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: On 2012-08-12 05:23:40 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    >:
    >: > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 20:31:20 -0700, Savageduck
    >: > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: > : On 2012-08-11 17:20:48 -0700, tony cooper <> said:
    >: > :
    >: > : > On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 16:58:37 -0700, Savageduck
    >: > : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >: > : >
    >: > : >> Now here there is something "wrong". The contrast due to the strong
    >: > : >> highlights (I suspect blown highlights in the color version) needs
    >: > : >> something else to fix the image. I don't believe there is a quick NIK
    >: > : >> fix for this. I think that this is one of those times an ND Grad might
    >: > : >> have helped. Perhaps adding a grad in ACR???
    >: > : >>
    >: > : >> Was there a particular reason you went B&W with this, or was it a
    >: > : >> rescue effort?
    >: > : >
    >: > : > No, I saw it as black and white from the start. I liked the lines and
    >: > : > the diagonals of the shadows. I was out and about and saw this in
    >: > : > early morning with the sun behind the trees. I pushed it to max
    >: > : > contrast deliberately. I didn't want detail.
    >: > : >
    >: > : > I wouldn't have shot it for a color image. I don't really remember
    >: > : > the original.
    >: > : >
    >: > : >> Why do I think there might have been CA issues through the tree tops.
    >: > : >
    >: > : > I wouldn't have worried about any CA because I wasn't interested in
    >: > : > any details in the leafy portions and expected any fringing to drop
    >: > : > out.
    >: > :
    >: > : Alright then! Shot with B&W in mind from the start, so CA not an issue.
    >: > : I just feel that it could be done a little differently from the
    >: > : original RAW, it still feels like something of a "rescue" to me.
    >: > :
    >: > : What I like is, unlike many others, you are prepared to step out of
    >: > : your comfort zone and shoot for experimentation.
    >: > : It can be fun.
    >: > :
    >: > : I know this is not your high contrast line of trees with the Sun behind
    >: > : them, but is this vaguely the sort of thing you had in mind?
    >: > : < http://db.tt/FGtA4wYe >
    >: >
    >: > I like Tony's trees better.
    >: >
    >: > Bob
    >:
    >: Come on! They both suck.
    >
    >Well.... Of the two, I prefer Tony's. I admit that the packing peanuts all
    >over the ground don't help it any, but the overall composition isn't bad.


    The image of the black and white trees that I linked to is *exactly*
    what I had in mind. It's a scene that I saw when driving, thought
    "That would make a good b&w image", snapped it, and processed it
    exactly as I wanted it to be. The "packing peanuts" are the way the
    grass looks when you process it as I processed it.

    I take photographs, I post photographs here and to the SI, and I post
    photographs to some online forums. I'm under no illusion that other
    people like all - or even some - of my photographs. That's very much
    to be expected, and I have the same feeling about the photographs of
    others. I don't get wounded when someone doesn't like a photograph of
    mine or suggests a major change in the composition or processing.

    What I saw in this scene was a row of parallel lines and a row of
    diagonals that appealed to me. I saw shapes and alignment of shapes,
    not trees.

    The Duck's image, to me, is a hodge-podge of shapes that don't
    contribute to a cohesive image. The extreme contrast of black and
    white doesn't do anything for the scene. A color version might work
    better, but - still - there's no real element of interest here. A
    converging line of trees has possibilities, but there's too much here.

    I accept the Duck's comment that my image is a mistake and an apparent
    rescue shot with good grace. That's his view, and he has the chops as
    a photographer to make that comment. I know that he has an eye even
    if it's not always the same eye that I'd use. I'm sure the Duck views
    my comments on his image the same.






    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Aug 12, 2012
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robert Coe

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    Robert Coe, Aug 5, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    480
    John McWilliams
    Sep 6, 2012
  2. ray

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    ray, Aug 6, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    235
  3. David Dyer-Bennet

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    David Dyer-Bennet, Aug 7, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    252
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Aug 7, 2012
  4. Charles E. Hardwidge

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    Charles E. Hardwidge, Aug 10, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    255
    Charles E. Hardwidge
    Aug 10, 2012
  5. PeterN

    Re: Would Ansel Adams use Photoshop?

    PeterN, Aug 10, 2012, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    263
    PeterN
    Aug 11, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page