Downtown Keller, Tx

00SS00SS Registered Users Posts: 730 Major grins
edited May 2, 2011 in Other Cool Shots
Hi all - just practicing some bw conversions - which one looks better (or neither :lol3)? I took two different approaches on the post and wondering which one works better.

#1
keller%20town%20hall%20-%20bw-L.jpg

#2 - I applied a 'gradient map' to this one and then manually adjusted the sliders to get where i wanted it.
downtown%20keller-bw-L.jpg

#3 - added this one to compare apples to apples - this one i just used the out of the box pse conversion (vivid landscape)
downtown%20keller-bw-ps%20conv2-L.jpg
Devin

Comments

  • Carmelo75Carmelo75 Registered Users Posts: 232 Major grins
    edited May 1, 2011
    For me, #2 is the one that works better, is has a very nice tonal variation and contrast. The first one has to much black in it, without an eye-catching bright subject to compensate...

    Andrea.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carmelo75
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited May 1, 2011
    Devin,

    Not sure how we could really tell about the different processing methods, given that your images are two completely different scenes, time of day, etc...

    If you want a comparison, process the same scene differently, then post those up for C&C.

    YMMV
    Randy
  • 00SS00SS Registered Users Posts: 730 Major grins
    edited May 1, 2011
    rwells wrote: »
    Devin,

    Not sure how we could really tell about the different processing methods, given that your images are two completely different scenes, time of day, etc...

    If you want a comparison, process the same scene differently, then post those up for C&C.

    YMMV
    good point randy - there were only taken about 20 min apart, but one has much more available light than the other. I'll re-work #2 in just a bit, thanks.
    Devin
  • 00SS00SS Registered Users Posts: 730 Major grins
    edited May 2, 2011
    just added in the same shot to compare - same shot just the first one is cropped a bit
    Devin
  • Carmelo75Carmelo75 Registered Users Posts: 232 Major grins
    edited May 2, 2011
    For me, #2 is the best conversion, as it retains more details in the building's walls...

    Andrea.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carmelo75
  • 00SS00SS Registered Users Posts: 730 Major grins
    edited May 2, 2011
    Carmelo75 wrote: »
    For me, #2 is the best conversion, as it retains more details in the building's walls...

    Andrea.
    Thanks for your input Andrea
    Devin
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited May 2, 2011
    Devin,

    Between #2 and #3, I much prefer #2. This processing brings out a lot more detail, and also lends a crispness to the image.

    Watch out for the halos around the building tops and the tree tops! If you process on a separate layer, you can use a mask and reduce the processing halo effect on those edges.

    Nice job!
    Randy
  • 00SS00SS Registered Users Posts: 730 Major grins
    edited May 2, 2011
    rwells wrote: »
    Devin,

    Between #2 and #3, I much prefer #2. This processing brings out a lot more detail, and also lends a crispness to the image.

    Watch out for the halos around the building tops and the tree tops! If you process on a separate layer, you can use a mask and reduce the processing halo effect on those edges.

    Nice job!

    Thanks Randy - much appreciate your input. I will give that a shot, as i finally understand what you mean and how to do that clap.gif
    Devin
Sign In or Register to comment.