Transitioning

[Red Barchetta]

I saw this white pelican swimming away in the distance this dark, cloudy morning and I liked the dark bg. I liked it so much I darkened it even more to create mor impact on the subject and ripples and then I tried it in B&W and with a Topaz effect. Which looks best, iyo?







--
-- Wisdom teaches us that none but birds should go out early, and that not even birds should do it unless they are out of worms.
- Mark Twain

 

[1elementin7groups]

Excellent project, Red. I prefer the first one.

Dave

 

[Mikel10]

Nice capture and effect. Lie both images 2 and 3. Thanks for sharing Red.

 

[JerseySailor]

Numbers 1 and 2 looked identical on my monitor, even after toggling back and forth several times. Number 3 was interesting, but the effect seemed a bit too much.

Might you want to re-post #3 with the effect turned down a bit?

 

[CompleteUtterNonsense]

#1 is best to me. The hint of colour in an otherwise b&w photo makes the image more dynamic.

#3 is interesting, but I think the effect is a bit too strong. It takes away from the main subject.

Edit: The lighting effect of Topaz does not quite square with the natural light source in the image. I don't know how you work around that.

 

[Red Barchetta]

Excellent project, Red. I prefer the first one.

Dave

Thanks, Dave.

 

[Red Barchetta]

Nice capture and effect. Lie both images 2 and 3. Thanks for sharing Red.

Thanks, Mike.

 

[Red Barchetta]

Numbers 1 and 2 looked identical on my monitor, even after toggling back and forth several times. Number 3 was interesting, but the effect seemed a bit too much.

Might you want to re-post #3 with the effect turned down a bit?

Thanks for your input, JS. I don't know what kind of monitor you have but it's bill in #1 has color, viewing it on my monitor anyway. I actually did tone it down from the highest setting, from 100 to 85 and with the ripples as white as they were I felt the sun rays had to be a little on the high side to match.

 

[Red Barchetta]

#1 is best to me. The hint of colour in an otherwise b&w photo makes the image more dynamic.

#3 is interesting, but I think the effect is a bit too strong. It takes away from the main subject.

Edit: The lighting effect of Topaz does not quite square with the natural light source in the image. I don't know how you work around that.

Thanks for commenting. I see what you're saying about the lighting effect, I suppose I looked at it differently.

 

[Barbie Heid]

I like the top one with the darkened background. To me it says he's enjoying his morning swim and is happy to have the place all to himself.

 

[Gary from Seattle]

Well, the problem is that you shot at -2.33, Which looks pretty underexposed (judging by the whites). I'd think you could have shot this at -1.33 and still not blown the whites. But that fine edge, just inside of where substantial whites are not recoverable, is where you should be on the original exposure.

Because you are pretty underexposed, when you lift shadows so much, the image is noisy and poor. So, although, the third image is to me the best image, it just doesn't work technically because of noise and poor definition of the Swan.

So, I would pick whichever image you prefer where shadows have not been substantially lifted.

 

[CompleteUtterNonsense]

#1 is best to me. The hint of colour in an otherwise b&w photo makes the image more dynamic.

#3 is interesting, but I think the effect is a bit too strong. It takes away from the main subject.

Edit: The lighting effect of Topaz does not quite square with the natural light source in the image. I don't know how you work around that.

Thanks for commenting. I see what you're saying about the lighting effect, I suppose I looked at it differently.

Artistic interpretation.

You can easily critique the technical and layout/design aspects of a photo, but what we like varies a lot.

I can remember some very lively debate at art school about Andy Warhol and his pop art and whether or not it was 'real' art. I was never a fan, but he was arguably the most successful artist of his time and the exception in making a very, very good living off his art.

I'm a real fan of simplicity and more minimalist art. Your first image speaks to that and really works for me.

What works for you may be very different.

 

[Red Barchetta]

#1 is best to me. The hint of colour in an otherwise b&w photo makes the image more dynamic.

#3 is interesting, but I think the effect is a bit too strong. It takes away from the main subject.

Edit: The lighting effect of Topaz does not quite square with the natural light source in the image. I don't know how you work around that.

Thanks for commenting. I see what you're saying about the lighting effect, I suppose I looked at it differently.

Artistic interpretation.

You can easily critique the technical and layout/design aspects of a photo, but what we like varies a lot.

I can remember some very lively debate at art school about Andy Warhol and his pop art and whether or not it was 'real' art. I was never a fan, but he was arguably the most successful artist of his time and the exception in making a very, very good living off his art.

I'm a real fan of simplicity and more minimalist art. Your first image speaks to that and really works for me.

What works for you may be very different.

I totally understand and I respect your decision. I'm mostly just glad that you went to art school and can spot/appreciate art in a photograph. Many people struggle with that.

 

[Red Barchetta]

I like the top one with the darkened background. To me it says he's enjoying his morning swim and is happy to have the place all to himself.

Thank you, I appreciate you commenting. It does seem to have a more isolated feel to it, doesn't it.

 

[Red Barchetta]

Well, the problem is that you shot at -2.33, Which looks pretty underexposed (judging by the whites). I'd think you could have shot this at -1.33 and still not blown the whites. But that fine edge, just inside of where substantial whites are not recoverable, is where you should be on the original exposure.

Because you are pretty underexposed, when you lift shadows so much, the image is noisy and poor. So, although, the third image is to me the best image, it just doesn't work technically because of noise and poor definition of the Swan.

So, I would pick whichever image you prefer where shadows have not been substantially lifted.

I appreciate your input and concern, but I don't think you understand what I was aiming for. I was trying to make the picture resemble a painting. The exposure wasn't a problem because I wanted it underexposed. As a matter of fact, I reduced the exposure even more while editing to make it even darker. I wanted a lot of black all around the bird and ripples to make them stand out and be the center of attention. I feel I achieved that pretty much.

Here's the original. You can see how I reduced the exposure to create more impact on the subject like I explained originally. I'm guessing this isn't what you're used to seeing, most people try to expose well for a good shot and here I went the opposite direction. That throws some people off.



--
-- Wisdom teaches us that none but birds should go out early, and that not even birds should do it unless they are out of worms.
- Mark Twain

 

[Gary from Seattle]

Well, the problem is that you shot at -2.33, Which looks pretty underexposed (judging by the whites). I'd think you could have shot this at -1.33 and still not blown the whites. But that fine edge, just inside of where substantial whites are not recoverable, is where you should be on the original exposure.

Because you are pretty underexposed, when you lift shadows so much, the image is noisy and poor. So, although, the third image is to me the best image, it just doesn't work technically because of noise and poor definition of the Swan.

So, I would pick whichever image you prefer where shadows have not been substantially lifted.

I appreciate your input and concern, but I don't think you understand what I was aiming for. I was trying to make the picture resemble a painting. The exposure wasn't a problem because I wanted it underexposed. As a matter of fact, I reduced the exposure even more while editing to make it even darker. I wanted a lot of black all around the bird and ripples to make them stand out and be the center of attention. I feel I achieved that pretty much.

Here's the original. You can see how I reduced the exposure to create more impact on the subject like I explained originally. I'm guessing this isn't what you're used to seeing, most people try to expose well for a good shot and here I went the opposite direction. That throws some people off.

Everybody's different but it doesn't work for me. Perhaps raising the black point from a more normal exposure or even just increasing contrast would allow you to hold the Pelican more nearly white - it is pretty grey - and still have the dark parts of the image near black.

 

[Red Barchetta]

Well, the problem is that you shot at -2.33, Which looks pretty underexposed (judging by the whites). I'd think you could have shot this at -1.33 and still not blown the whites. But that fine edge, just inside of where substantial whites are not recoverable, is where you should be on the original exposure.

Because you are pretty underexposed, when you lift shadows so much, the image is noisy and poor. So, although, the third image is to me the best image, it just doesn't work technically because of noise and poor definition of the Swan.

So, I would pick whichever image you prefer where shadows have not been substantially lifted.

I appreciate your input and concern, but I don't think you understand what I was aiming for. I was trying to make the picture resemble a painting. The exposure wasn't a problem because I wanted it underexposed. As a matter of fact, I reduced the exposure even more while editing to make it even darker. I wanted a lot of black all around the bird and ripples to make them stand out and be the center of attention. I feel I achieved that pretty much.

Here's the original. You can see how I reduced the exposure to create more impact on the subject like I explained originally. I'm guessing this isn't what you're used to seeing, most people try to expose well for a good shot and here I went the opposite direction. That throws some people off.

Everybody's different but it doesn't work for me. Perhaps raising the black point from a more normal exposure or even just increasing contrast would allow you to hold the Pelican more nearly white - it is pretty grey - and still have the dark parts of the image near black.

Sorry it doesn't work for you.

--
-- Wisdom teaches us that none but birds should go out early, and that not even birds should do it unless they are out of worms.
- Mark Twain