- This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This is one of my first pictures edited in B&W. Any suggestions?
ISO: 400
Exposure: 1/800
Aperture: 13
And I added +2/3 exposure compensation.Attachments:
Okay, I’ll criticize my picture. I felt that there was too much space at the bottom of the picture. I propose here a tighter crop.
- This reply was modified 55 years, 2 months ago by .
Attachments:
Good crop! I think you’re right, it does seem to improve the image.
To me, the sky seems to be a little bit too contrasty. I’m not sure what it actually looked like, but it just doesn’t quite look natural to me. Maybe just pulling down the highlights a little would do the trick, I don’t know for sure.
Thanks!
You’re right about the un-natural look. I pulled the ”reflects” (I’m not sure how it’s called in English, correct me if I’m wrong) almost to zero, if I can recall correctly, to darken the clouds and add some contrast. I thought the sky was too featureless… Is it better now?
I attach two pictures, the corrected one and the unedited original (except for the B&W)- This reply was modified 55 years, 2 months ago by .
Attachments:
“reflects”… that might be referring to highlights?
I would agree that they should be pulled down a bit, the sky is definitely over-exposed. See if you can bring down the highlights without affecting the contrast so much. I like the contrast in the original, it just needs the highlights adjusted.
Maybe something like this… (See attached)
The problem with that is, now the image lacks the “punch” that it had before. I read somewhere that a B&W image should always have some true blacks and true whites in it. Many B&W pictures only have shades of grey, and therefore, they lack something. If you adjust the blacks and whites a bit, it will often improve the image.
Attachments:
Yeah, you’re right, I was referring to highlights. I just didn’t knew the proper term for it since my Windows editing program is in French. I’m now learning photography plus English! 🙂
I like your edited version : it is a neat improvement from my first picture.
- This reply was modified 55 years, 2 months ago by .
Hi guys! Great discussion here. I appreciate the step by step help , @buddingphotographer. You don’t know how encouraging it is to me to know that you, @Mr. Quebec, are learning and growing so much!
Aside from the “contrasty” topic, I wanted to bring up something else that I noted about the picture. Perhaps what made me notice this was the fact that I ran into a similar problem the other day while out taking pictures of a sunrise. See the attached image (2845)? Notice how the clouds in the background, behind the tree, disrupt the “distinctness” of the tree? Though the tree is very much a silhouette, it really isn’t “distinct” against the background. This keeps the tree from taking any real shape, and thus not catching the eye as being as attractive as it could be. In your shot, the darker clouds behind the tree on the left side cause the same problem.
There’s not much you can do about this except to learn to see it, and either re-position yourself or wait for the darker clouds to pass. Yes, I’m being pretty picky here, but it’s something to take notice of.
In my situation, my attempt to re-position (2847) was not successful, as by that time, the sun was too far up and the clouds too close to the tree to get the shot I was looking for.
Attachments:
@JamesStaddon You’re right about the “distinctness” of the tree. Now that you mention it, I can see what you mean…
That’s a good thing to keep in mind if you’re looking for silhouettes, and “distinctness”.
Thanks!
I think I understand your idea of ”distinctness” of the silhouette.
I’ve been to the same spot today, but the sky didn’t wanted to cooperate. The weather was very cloudy, and there were no sun at all, but I thought that since I wanted a B&W picture, it wouldn’t be as bad has it looked.
This picture was edited to help with the underexposed look. The sky is pretty flat and featureless, but at least my silhouette is clear from distractions. Is this one looks better?Attachments:
Yes, I do like this shot. It’s neat that you had the opportunity to shoot it again with the “distinctness” in mind. Perhaps you will many opportunities to shoot it under many different weather conditions . . . and perhaps many different angles. Your subject reminds me of http://www.ThatTree.net. 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.