This image of Glacier Point from 13,800' on Eolus was shot in mid-morning light and obliquely backlit. I liked the ruggedness and layers and thought it would work well as a black and white.
My goal was to lighten the sky and contrast against the very dark rock, but hold detail and maintain the varied tonality in the layers of mountains.
How does it look and what does it need?
Thanks!
Posted by John Mumaw on September 2, 2009 at 8:02 PM
I like it!
Real nice range of tones throughout that gives one a lot to look at.
B&W gives this area a rugged, harsh look almost like a mountain range in the desolate wastelands rather than Colorado.
That's a good thing, though!
No nits about the processing.
You might consider burning in that range on the far horizon ever so slightly (esp. towards the right side where it transitions into the next closest range), but that's a matter of taste for me.
This image was perfect for b&w, and you did a great job with it.
Posted by Chris Rice on September 2, 2009 at 8:15 PM
So Dave, what I enjoy with this image is it could look vintage - in my opinion, you ought to consider toning it a bit, and adding some vignetting and it could look like a William Henry Jackson mountain print from the late 19th century. Nice work getting up there!
Posted by Nat Coalson on September 2, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Not sure I like this this one... the first two things I noticed:
1. The bright white sky, and the far peak pointing out the top of the frame.
2. The "v" shape toward the bottom that pulls my eye out the bottom of the frame.
Overall I think the lines and shapes created by them are feeling harried and frantic, with no cohesion.
I guess I'm not sure where I'm supposed to look; what's it a picture of (besides the obvious "mountains").
Also, something (maybe the conversion) makes it look slightly out of focus in the distance.
All that being said, the overall look of it does remind me of a very old photo.... and in this way it does have a certain mood to it. Just not my cup of tea.
Posted by Erik Aagaard on September 2, 2009 at 8:44 PM
I think you achieved your goals of lightening the sky and contrast against the very dark rock, but holding detail and maintaining the varied tonality in the layers of mountains. That said, this image doesn't "speak" to me the same way as much of your work does.
I wonder if the reason this has the look of an old photograph is because old emulsions were very sensitive to blue light, and as a result the sky was typically white and shadows had more density on the negative than modern emulsions.
Erik
Posted by Jesse Speer on September 2, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Dave, I'm not b/w expert ... but here is my honest feedback. I definitely appreciate the layering concept, tonal treatment and preservation of detail through your processing. But I agree with Nat when it comes to the heart of the image. The dark triangle in the middle is like a visual black hole for my eyes, fighting with the interest going on elsewhere. My eyes get pulled off the left, instead of grabbing hold of your intended concept. I am a huge fan of cropping to enhance focus, and I think this is a good candidate. It's easier just to post my suggestion - since you asked. What do you think of this? With a simple crop, the image becomes more about the layering of tone. And cropping the triangle and a bit of clutter makes it easier for the eyes to flow from near/far ... in my opinion anyway. Food for thought.
Posted by John Mumaw on September 2, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Hey....that's not a bad idea!
Posted by Todd Caudle on September 2, 2009 at 10:17 PM
Leave it to Professor Speer to take what I think is a really good photo and whittle it down to its greatness quotient. I do like the cropped version better, it seems to be more powerful. Now I need to keep my eyes open for crop potential like that in my own images!
Well, that was fun. Thanks for weighing in and contributing to the discussion. I appreciate the wide range of opinions and the Speer-crop makes it a stronger image. I do feel there is a lower left to upper right flow and the crop makes it more "focused".
Discussion
8 repliesThis image of Glacier Point from 13,800' on Eolus was shot in mid-morning light and obliquely backlit. I liked the ruggedness and layers and thought it would work well as a black and white.
My goal was to lighten the sky and contrast against the very dark rock, but hold detail and maintain the varied tonality in the layers of mountains.
How does it look and what does it need?
Thanks!
Real nice range of tones throughout that gives one a lot to look at.
B&W gives this area a rugged, harsh look almost like a mountain range in the desolate wastelands rather than Colorado.
That's a good thing, though!
No nits about the processing.
You might consider burning in that range on the far horizon ever so slightly (esp. towards the right side where it transitions into the next closest range), but that's a matter of taste for me.
This image was perfect for b&w, and you did a great job with it.
1. The bright white sky, and the far peak pointing out the top of the frame.
2. The "v" shape toward the bottom that pulls my eye out the bottom of the frame.
Overall I think the lines and shapes created by them are feeling harried and frantic, with no cohesion.
I guess I'm not sure where I'm supposed to look; what's it a picture of (besides the obvious "mountains").
Also, something (maybe the conversion) makes it look slightly out of focus in the distance.
All that being said, the overall look of it does remind me of a very old photo.... and in this way it does have a certain mood to it. Just not my cup of tea.
I wonder if the reason this has the look of an old photograph is because old emulsions were very sensitive to blue light, and as a result the sky was typically white and shadows had more density on the negative than modern emulsions.
Erik