Black and white

Tatooine Hobbies & Interests
1

After the weekends photo taking, thought i would pop a few into photoshop and have a fiddle with them. One thing i notice is how diffrent an image can look in black+White rather than colour.
Larger
Larger

All thats been done to the images is some croping and the b+w action :slight_smile:

Edit: thumbnails removed, updates below :wink:

2

It is amazing how different a pic can look in B&W :nod:

I do like B&W pics for a lot of things, but some pics just look better in colour :agree:

3

for that one in particular, I would try to tone down the contrast on the original first, in black and white lighting becomes more noticeable. The eye leans to the brightness on the right of the image, missing what the image is trying to give with the black and white effect.

Just my opinion :smiley:

DT.

4

You know what, your right :smiley:

Larger

Larger

5

:thumbsup: :cool:

and you beat me to the edit as I got sidetracked, that’s almost spot on to what I have open in Paint Shop Pro :smiley:

DT.

6

I like it with some highlight and shadow recovery from CS…

DSCF0113SH.jpg800×410

7

Damn Dan that looks good:thumbsup:

8

I do like black and white pictures. There is somthing about them that can make the picture stand out a lot better.

my grandfather used to do photography and he developed his own pic and they were all black and white. Sometimes i think it can make the quality of the picture better in b/w i feel it draws your eyes to the important parts of the picture where with colour you dont get drawn to the main part of the pic.

9

I think that having too much detail in the forground, will not allow the viewers eyes to drift down the hedge to the barn and then out to the peaks in the background. After all the peaks are the main subject of photo, with the hedge and trees as a frame and the barn as apoint of intrest :slight_smile:

10

It’s an interesting delima. When you cast your gaze around various points in a scene, each item comes into focus as you look at it, and your eye and brain even adjust “levels” a bit to let you see the details in the dark or light areas; all without concious thought. Not to mention the mental color correction that ignores the temperature of the light and insists that “yellow” is still “yellow”.

But cameras don’t often work that way. Depth of field is usually set for a single distance in any photo. You often see artistic use of it, to make a single item pop, and it’s very effective. But it’s remarkable because your own eyesight by and large doesn’t give the usual apperance of working that way.

Sometimes getting the camera to do what you don’t expect cameras to do can be striking. And extremely near to extremely far in focus can be unusual. Here’s an example, from one of my favorite sites: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/graphics/ClareSphere.jpg

11

Stunning gallery. Thanks Dan. Truly a member of the f64 club.

12

Almost! I think he does some photo wizardy after the fact; one of his tutorials shows the same pic with close focus, and then again with far focus. I think the final version is a computer assisted merging of the two.

I shoot underwater mostly (while diving), and for the longest time on macro shots tried to work the smallest aperture I could to get the deepest depth of field. On a 105mm, at a distance of 9", an f/32 DOF could end up being a fraction of an inch. Then I came across this while researching optimal aperture (Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks), and now I’m wondering if pushing the f-stop might have made a lot of my pics fuzzy. There is a picture of a sweater or rug in the section What it looks like, if you mouse over the f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22 and wait a sec, you’ll see that the darn image is actually much sharper at f/8 than it is at f/22. Was news to me.

FYI the upper part of the same page has a mouse-over tool for determining optimal aperture for a variety of digital sensor sizes. Mouse over your camera or sensor size to select (blue grid pattern), then mouse over the various f-stops until the airy disc blob just about fills a sensor. Turns out my baby (D2x) has an optimial aperture somewhere around f/8 to f/11. Not what I was wanting. Small digi-cams seem to be sharpest around f/4 to f5/6; smaller lens means diffraction rears it’s ugly head that much earlier…

13

:eek: That’s my college! :slight_smile:

That is a truly fantastic picture from a truly lovely bridge. I walk across it practically every day. :nod:

EDIT: Just been looking around the site. That person is a really good photographer. The pictures are so vibrant. It’s good to see some well known places in a new light. :thumbsup: