1 image - 2 treatments

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

1 image - 2 treatments

Postby stubbsy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:42 pm

Two takes on the same image. Both appeal to me, but the B & W is ahead by a nose. I'd appreciate your thoughts (even if you think both treatments suck)

Image


Image
Last edited by stubbsy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby xerubus on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:45 pm

#2 without a doubt for me... but i'm a B&W zealot :)

cheers
http://www.markcrossphotography.com - A camera, glass, and some light.
User avatar
xerubus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:33 pm
Location: Nth Brisbane

Postby norbs on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:45 pm

I rather the B&W. It goes against everything I keep telling people, but it just seems to show the sky in a different mood.

The colour looks a bit washed out to me, but that may have been what you were going for.

Hows that horizon? :)
Last edited by norbs on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
norbs
Member
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 10:05 pm
Location: -30.940579 144.421865

Postby MATT on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:45 pm

Colour for me,

The image has more appeal and depth. It seems a nice tranquil pic


MATT
User avatar
MATT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Biloela, QLD-----nikon--D700-----

Postby sheepie on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:46 pm

It's a bloody big nose mate - B&W by a country mile :)
*** When getting there is half the fun! ***
User avatar
sheepie
Key Member
 
Posts: 3029
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 11:56 am
Location: Picnic Point, Sydney Australia *** Nikon D200/D70 ***

Postby Justin on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:48 pm

Love the B&W. 0.2 degrees CCW and it would be perfect :lol:
D3 | 18-200VR | 50:1.4 | 28:2.8 | 35-70 2.8 | 12-24 f4
picasaweb.google.com/JustinPhotoGallery
"We don't know and we don't care"
User avatar
Justin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Newtown, Sydeny

Postby NJ on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:54 pm

B&W for sure! the sky is so much more powerful in the black and white!
Nathan
D700 | MB-D10 | Nikkor 14-24 | Nikkor 24-70 | Sigma 70-200 | 20 2.8 28 2.8 35 2 50 1.8 | Sigma 105 | SB-800
http://www.flickr.com/nathanjphoto/
User avatar
NJ
Senior Member
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Ringwood, Melbourne

Postby stubbsy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:54 pm

Looks like the B & W is in front. I also forgot to thank Leigh for his help with the custom OptikVerv B & Wfilter
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby Blackspear on Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:55 pm

2nd one is striking.

Very nice indeed.

Cheers :D
User avatar
Blackspear
Member
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

Postby poompy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:17 pm

B&W for the win! The sky looks so more dramatic.
User avatar
poompy
Member
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Postby gstark on Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:26 pm

Peter,

Colour.

But you need to crop about 75% of the path from the bottom first. Just leave a thin ribbon of concrete along the bottom, and tell me what you think.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22924
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby Oscar on Thu Sep 14, 2006 7:59 pm

Peter, of the shots as posted I prefer the b&w - but if cropping, as Gary suggests, it changes the mood of both shots and the colour comes right back into consideration. Cheers, Mick
User avatar
Oscar
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:15 am
Location: Panania, Sydney

Postby Glen on Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:17 pm

B& W here too, but like Gary's crop
User avatar
Glen
Moderator
 
Posts: 11819
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Sydney - Neutral Bay - Nikon

Postby stubbsy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:26 pm

Thanks to you all. Here's the recropped colour as per Gary's suggestion:

Image
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby Matt. K on Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:09 pm

Peter
There's nobody sitting on the seat? What am I supposed to look at? :D :D :D :D
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Postby stubbsy on Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:10 pm

Matt. K wrote:Peter
There's nobody sitting on the seat? What am I supposed to look at? :D :D :D :D

Matt - It's something I thought about too
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby Aussie Dave on Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:18 am

Peter
I prefer the colour version....and the crop (as Gary suggested) I feel suits the image better. It has more "weight" at the bottom, leaving the expanse of the sky to finish the image nicely.

I'm not sure if it's my LCD monitor at work (which isn't calibrated), but the colour version seems to lack a very slight touch of contrast (IMO)....however this may only be due to my monitor.

Nice work.
Dave
Nikon D7000 | 18-105 VR Lens | Nikon 50 1.8G | Sigma 70-300 APO II Super Macro | Tokina 11-16 AT-X | Nikon SB-800 | Lowepro Mini Trekker AWII
Photography = Compromise
User avatar
Aussie Dave
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1427
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: West. Suburbs, Melbourne [Nikon D7000]

Postby gstark on Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:48 am

Peter,

Thanx, and yes, I think the crop, and in colour, is the winner.

But here is something very interesting for you to ponder.

With the cropped version (I've not check this in the other two) you have the image level in terms of the path at the bottom matching the crop line.

But the horizon - actually a false horizon, as it's the shoreline on the other side of the water - is not level. I am not sure what I would do about this, because while it's not a true horizon, it sill acts as one.

As I said, interesting to ponder. :)
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22924
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby Dougie on Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:54 pm

I would have to say that the B&W treatment emphasises the mood in the shot
As soon as you make something idiot proof they build a better idiot.
Dougie
Member
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 10:27 am
Location: Gladstone Qld

Postby stubbsy on Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:06 pm

Thank you all for your critiques.

Gary - as for your "level" condundrum my answer is this - the finished image sans the problem (done using a feathered selection of that part of the horizon across the whole of the image followed by a skew of just that piece to "lift" the RHS)

Image

Edit: Fixed image to be the recropped version
Last edited by stubbsy on Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything.
*** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
User avatar
stubbsy
Moderator
 
Posts: 10748
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:44 pm
Location: Newcastle NSW - D700

Postby gstark on Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:26 pm

Peter,

EnergyPolice would be impressed with your solution. :)
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22924
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby ABG on Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:36 pm

gstark wrote:Peter,

EnergyPolice would be impressed with your solution. :)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

B & W by a mile for me Stubbsy
Andrew
User avatar
ABG
Senior Member
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: Oatley, Sydney

Postby Mj on Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:27 pm

I'll go the colour version Peter... I think your treatment on the B&W too aggressive for my taste, but I also think the subject matter better suits the nice pastel colours you've presented. I also agree with the new crop but more because it removes some blemishes on the concrete path that were a distraction from the rest of the composition.
Photography is not a crime, but perhaps my abuse of artistic license is?
User avatar
Mj
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:37 pm
Location: Breakfast Point, Sydney {Australia}

Just to be difficult...

Postby zafra52 on Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:46 pm

Actually, I like the three of them...but the colour cropped one I think is the better one of the two. However, just imagine the cropped one in black and white with someone's back contemplating the weather. So, I think I like the B&W because of the mood it creates.
User avatar
zafra52
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4860
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:22 pm
Location: Brisbane


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques