Black & White Conversion - Looking For Opinions / Feedback

Brody

I did a B&W conversion which I was pretty pleased with but a friend said it wasn't dark enough, so I did a darker version which he likes, but I'm not so sure. I'm also curious as to your preference of B&W or the original color version at bottom (previosly posted). Your constructive comments will be appreciated.

#1


#2


#3



Thanks in advance for your feedback, John

.

Tango

Out of the B&W, #1 seems to be my choice. But to be honest, IMO the B&W takes all the life out of your original posted image and does not seem to enhance this scene in anyway.

My vote is stick with #3 and enjoy it "as is"


my .02


Does anyone back my opinion or am I better to just get lost?

Sam

I think I prefer the color version but the B&W is nice as well. One thing I would be careful about is trying to please everyone. You can't do it.

Absolutely ask for C&C. Getting input from another set of eyes is invaluable. Think about what has been said, evaluate and then make up your own mind.

Otherwise you will be altering the image for ever.

Sam

Brody

Aaron, I think your opinion is worth more like a dime, not the $.02 you requested. Please post bank account # and password here and I'll make the payment

Kidding aside, I asked for your opinion and you gave it - Thanks for the feedback.



And Sam, thanks for your comments also. My skin is getting thicker with time.

If you know of any B&W gurus here on SmugMug who specialize in Cartier-Bresson / Brassai / Willy Ronis film style images, but done with digital, please let me know.


Thanks again, John

.

pathfinder

Hi Brody,

I have liked B&W since the days I shot Tri-X and souped it in D76, so that's a bit of my background.

One of the nice things about digital images is that they allow almost unlimited experimentation with B&W conversion. You get to control what you want to be your highlights and what you want to be your shadows via your B&W conversion process.

Like Brody, I tend to favor monochrome images with deep blacks, real dark shadows, and even some loss of lower quarter tone detail, over a nice smoothly graduate B&W image without real punch.

In short, I favor the 2nd B&W image. While the color image has nice tones, the warmth of the tungsten light is too much for my taste. I might even try a bit of a blue tone in the shadows of the second B&W image, to achieve a cooler overall tonality. I might even consider adding a bit of grain to further remove the image from its digital roots. I think I might burn down the brightness in the areas under the arches of the bridge as well ( overlay blend perhaps ), to tone them down a bit, so they compete less with my eye with the brighter, upper portion of the image.

I think B&W images are best evaluated as prints under an appropriate light source, rather than on an LCD display, since the contrast ratio is so much smaller in a B&W print compared to an modern LCD display - unless the final goal for the image is to be displayed on an LCD rather than a print on paper. Something to think about.

dlplumer

I like them all and I agree with all the comments, which are not mutually exclusive. Nice shot

Try Pathfinders' suggestions and go with what you like.

silvereye

Im pretty new here on this site, but I saw this and thought I might just chime in. The second B&W is my favorite out of all 3. I am pretty sure its because for years I only shot B&W but thats niether here nor there. The 1st photo's highlights look just a tad "Hot" to me.. nothing too major. The color version one does work very well but if I had to choose...#2 is spot on

Dwayne Oakes

Great old town night shots ! The only thing I would do differently would
get rid of the moon as it is stealing the show. The lights and reflection
are the stars in this photo also I would go with Duotone, for some
reason is works really well will old town night shots as it adds mystery
to the photo. But thats just me.

Also the photo is a tad noisy which is common in most night photos
I would put the photo through NR software.

Hope this helps and thanks for posting !

Take care,
Dwayne Oakes

squirl033

of the B&W conversions, i prefer the lighter one... the second edit loses too much detail. but i like the color image better still... the golden glow of the lights adds a certain something to the photo. Duane has a good point, too... lose the moon. it's just a bright spot in the sky, and distracts the eye from the marvelous buildings and reflections.

dlplumer

Wow, love Dwayne's version also.

Tango

John, of course if you cloned the moon out you would also do something with the reflected moon...
Maybe clone out all the buildings, except you will need the tower to pull off the Emerald City treatment.

pathfinder

Hi Aaron, nice catch!

That's what happens when you start editing someone else's image, isn't it?

Flowerman

John here is my $0.03 worth. The color shot is the ONLY one - the B&W conversion lost too much of the detail in the shot and brightened up the moon. The blue cast one is too unreal for me.
You might get some useful C & C if you gave the steps you used for B&W conversion. IMO it was not a clear conversion. By the way - I grew up with B&W and was the most happy fella when Kodak Exktachrome came in to existence - I remember pushing it to 1200 for church shots w/o flash for a friends wedding - had to be processed in Rochester, N.Y. (Kodak Headquarters). Color is what we see - B&W was just a step in the evolution of photography, IMO.

Ed Siciliano

www.photoman74.smugmug.com


P.S. You guesed it 74 is my age.

squirl033

Flowerman wrote: »

John here is my $0.03 worth. The color shot is the ONLY one - the B&W conversion lost too much of the detail in the shot and brightened up the moon. The blue cast one is too unreal for me.
You might get some useful C & C if you gave the steps you used for B&W conversion. IMO it was not a clear conversion. By the way - I grew up with B&W and was the most happy fella when Kodak Exktachrome came in to existence - I remember pushing it to 1200 for church shots w/o flash for a friends wedding - had to be processed in Rochester, N.Y. (Kodak Headquarters). Color is what we see - B&W was just a step in the evolution of photography, IMO.

Ed Siciliano

www.photoman74.smugmug.com


P.S. You guesed it 74 is my age.

like you, i grew up with B&W film and Brownie cameras, but even in this day of digital capture and Photoshop, i think B&W still has a place, particularly in fine art photography. just because it is an older style doesn't invalidate it as a means of expression. i shoot mostly color, because the kinds of things i do lend themselves far more to that format, but there are still times when black & white can be very dramatic and effective. i'm just not certain this image is one of them...