Creative photography

[Mike54]

sending down an icy blast from Canada (along with 50+ mile an hour winds) I've been relegated to playing with monochrome conversions of old images.

Actually it started over a week ago but it's more fun to blame someone for my weather predicament.

Anyway, if you'd be interested in taking a look at some of the results you can check them out here. Feel free to tear 'em up, honest feedback is always appreciated.

[ShutterbugGail]

As always, they are GREAT Mike. I should play with B&W once and a while.

I love the lighthouse! I also love the one with the bench. I wish it was cropped tighter though. Would like to see some of the surroundings but not have my eyes hunt too much for the focal point.

Nice work!

[Mike54]

Thanks for looking Gail.

Would like to see some of the surroundings but not have my eyes hunt too much for the focal point.

I understand, I think my problem is that, as my creation, my eyes jump immediately to the focal point and don't go through the searching unfamiliar eyes might. I'll have to work on viewing from the other side.

[Deb]

Hi Mike, I'm so happy to see these. To me, black & white, moreso than color, is preferred for conveying mood and texture. Color, often, is so distracting that one can miss these things in an image.

You did a great job at converting the waterfall shots. The power of the shadows contrast nicely with the brilliance of the flowing water. Lovely!

I wonder how "Portland Head" would look applying a red filter to darken the blue sky (I'm assuming it was blue) and pop out that cloud a little more before BW conversion .....

[Mike54]

Thanks for taking the time to look Deb, I appreciate the feedback. I tried each of these with several conversions and went with the one I felt "fit" each one. Of course tomorrow it might be a different look that works.
Here's a different version of Portland Head Light without the sepia toning and with red filtering (larger version linked).

I actually tried two entirely different (red filter) conversions with virtually no difference in results (one was ever so slightly lighter). Oddly, with this image the cloud didn't seem to change much while with a couple of other images taken of the same subject I was able to pull a little more out of the cloud.

[Deb]

Hi there, how strange, I don't see any difference in tonal representation. I would have expected to see an obvious difference. Hmmmmmmm ...... How about uploading the color image. Let's play ....  

[Mike54]

Let's play...

Soon as I get home this afternoon, I'd love to see what you can pull out of it.

[Deb]

Great! This will be fun! I'll look for it this evening.  

[bdery]

Sorry I could not log in before to say Hey! don't blame ME!

Great work Mike. I think for the water shots, those that have a white texture (foam or water cascading) come up better. I love the architecture shots in general, and how you sometimes use sepia, sometimes B&W, and sometimes other tones. Your skills at composition always impress me! And you've given me a urge to revisit some of my pics to see how monochrome can improve them. I have a few in mind. I won't be able to do anything tonight, but later this week I'll try to upload a few.

[Mike54]

Thanks Bernard, I think every image needs something a little different to help it stand out and as I said earlier it might change (depending on mood). I also don't think that monochrome necessarily works for everything but in the future I'll probably check as I review just in case.

[Mike54]

Sorry Deb, I stopped to shoot some frozen waterfalls on the way home.

Here's the color version

Let me know if bigger would be better to work with. Can't wait to see the results.

[Deb]

Oh boy! Frozen waterfall! I can't wait to see them!

I snagged your color photo and will play with it. What fun! The size you provided is fine.  

[Mike54]

Sneak peak Deb, it's a bit on the different side but for some reason I think it's the best one I got. > Wish I had a chainsaw  

[Deb]

That's gorgeous! As for the chainsaw, ha, ha, ha!!! thanks to that downed tree, small critters have a way over the creek.   And, it makes a nice natural frame for your subject too.  

When I did the winter shoot for the WLT last February, the brook was frozen in places and it was absolutely spectacular; ice encrusted tree roots, heavy frozen cascades, thin delicate ice sheets. Truly breathtaking! I spent quite a bit of time photographing it. And, in case Bernard is reading this and wondering, yes, I did use a tripod.  

As for down here, we don't get that kind of effect very often.    So seeing it there was very special.

[bdery]

in case Bernard is reading this and wondering, yes, I did use a tripod.

One would think an advantage of DSLRs is the possibility do work without a tripod in daylight

As I said earlier, Mike's great results inspired me to revisit a few pics. The images themselves do not even come close to the beautiful waterfalls Mike seems to find each two steps, but tell me if you like what monochrome does to the images. I used plain Nikon Editor, turned the pics to sepia or B&W, and for the latter I then played with the RGB levels to bring out more warmth.

Monochrome

[Mike54]

I think the conversions work Bernard but the high contrast on the waterfalls (sunny / shaded) takes away from the images, at least for me. I really like the one of the jetty (5327bw2) but the one with the pond and reflection is super.

One would think an advantage of DSLRs is the possibility do work without a tripod in daylight

The dslr works fine handheld in daylight for birds, bugs and various flora but when I'm doing landscape I try to avoid "daylight". I prefer (early) morning, (late) evening or overcast days and usually need that tripod 'cause my hands ain't as steady as the once were with the slower shutter speeds.

[Deb]

One would think an advantage of DSLRs is the possibility do work without a tripod in daylight

Ah young Grasshopper, you are forgetting about the need for a tripod when shooting in daylight at slow shutterspeeds (used to increase that blur softness in moving water) with fine apertures (for greater DOF) .... and, when using a very fine aperture at very close range without a flash (macro-like work again with deep DOF). 

[bdery]

Ah young Grasshopper,

I graduated!

you are forgetting about the need for a tripod when shooting in daylight at slow shutterspeeds (used to increase that blur softness in moving water) with fine apertures (for greater DOF) .... and, when using a very fine aperture at very close range without a flash (macro-like work again with deep DOF).

True, for whaterfalls anyone needs a tripod, or rock-hard hands. It's also true that dawn and duk might call for a tripod. I just often shoot landscapes while hicking, capturing landscapes as I walk, and that's usually done by daylight. Less dramatic, but more convenient...

[Deb]

I graduated!

That's right, you did! Well, I'll just have to come up with another name for ya.  

Now Mike, I've got a bw sample of the lighthouse image for ya but, silly me, I don't remember how to insert it. Duh!!  Clicking "insert image" does nothing for me. Am I too far gone? Do you think you can teach me?  

EDIT: I'll just email it to  ya ........

[Mike54]

WOW, you really pulled that cloud out. I've tried a buncha different conversions and couldn't pull that off. I guess I too am no more than a grasshopper...  Hmmmn, grasshopper time for self portraits maybe? Now where did I put that macro lens...

Do you think you can teach me?

Once you've got the image online somewhere just paste in the url and put ["img"]url["/img"] tags around it.   No quotes, I put them in so you could see the tags.