Interesting. You might see about increasing the contrast in both of these. Could be my monitor, but they seem sort of "mid-toney" to me.
Posted by Todd Caudle on March 8, 2011 at 11:09 PM
Interesting. This might be the first Silver Efex image I've seen yet that doesn't work. Ken pegged it with his "mid-toney" description. This almost looks like a negative rendition of a completely unrelated to White Sands image.
I don't have those expensive NIK programs and I often wonder if better results could be achieved without them in some cases. (Just because you have them, doesn't mean that you have to use them) I agree that the second versions look better than the first, but I don't think that they look very natural, unless "unnatural" is your artistic goal.
I certainly like the composition, so I wouldn't give up on it.
Couldn't agree more with Jim's comment - judging by the 2nd image, there's a compelling shot in there and I don't think it needs - or even benefits from - an assault with a phalanx of processing tools. Subtle adjustments to curves and levels, some selective dodging/burning may be the most simple and effective route.
For me, the compelling aspect of White Sands is the gentle pastels that seem to define the place. With few exceptions during my time shooting there, it's an extremely condensed tonal range. It's the one place where I felt like Velvia had no problem capturing the natural range of light - sans filters no less! Not at all surprised that there's a desire for more contrast; the trick, I think, it adding it selectively and in limited dosage so as to retain the soft quality of light.
The second image above is the one that is most appealing to me, though it feels a little muddy, almost HDR-ish in the sand. That's where I'd focus my attention. Maybe reduce the contrast in the sky to better pair with the natural contrast of the sand.
Going b&w leaves behind the defining pastels, and also makes it difficult - though not impossible - to come up with an image that feels natural. Converting a WS image like the one above to high-contrast b&w will make it very easy to overcook - in general, we have an appreciation for higher contrast, but my very personal opinion is that high contrast just doesn't apply here. Maybe high-key/low contrast, though I'm not sure this image is a good candidate.
I would like to thank all of you that have replied. It has been a real learning experience. I find shooting at White Sands to be difficult at best. And, processing is also even more difficult.
When I use the Nik filters, I use them sparingly...small percentages of each effect.
I will go back to ground 0 and start over.
Thanks again.
Glad you reposted, Dave. I noticed a slight color cast right away that isn't too flattering and have posted a version with no color cast above. This may help you get off on the right foot.
Well, once I got started...here's a version with a contrast bump, a vibrance bump and a bit of sharpening. This is really a great image you captured! I'll remove these edits immediately if you wish.
Thanks John.
These images are really helpful. I usually use Nik's "remove color cast" on my WS images but I purposefully left all of the filter off. My last version is a bit blue.
Thanks again.
The greenish color cast is a NIkon thing. I owned the d200, d90, d700 and lived in the greenish color cast days. The d200 seemed the coolest of the cameras. The sensor is geared more to cooler white balance settings. It's my opinion that Nikon wants the Low Light customer, the photojournalist. You get a myriad of clean 2.8 lenses, clean high ISO's, low megapixels, killer autofocus, 4 cameras that shoot 5-8 frames per second.....and a cooler base White Balance.
However, you can pump up the WB into the K6000 to achieve the warmer landscape tonalities.
Just my opinion. Love Nikon. Miss my 14-24
.
Posted by Jim Bennett on March 10, 2011 at 12:12 AM
I really like John's editing in his last version.
Posted by Kurt Bowman on March 10, 2011 at 9:46 AM
Dave, this was nicely seen and I agree a lot with Rick's assessment. I personally would also keep this in color, because I like the pastels and the B&W version doesn't translate that well.
Discussion
20 repliesIt was processed in LR3, CS5 & Nik filters and finished w/ SEP2.
Any comments would be appreciated.
D200, 24-85 f/2.8
Tripod etc.
Thanks for looking.
I certainly like the composition, so I wouldn't give up on it.
For me, the compelling aspect of White Sands is the gentle pastels that seem to define the place. With few exceptions during my time shooting there, it's an extremely condensed tonal range. It's the one place where I felt like Velvia had no problem capturing the natural range of light - sans filters no less! Not at all surprised that there's a desire for more contrast; the trick, I think, it adding it selectively and in limited dosage so as to retain the soft quality of light.
The second image above is the one that is most appealing to me, though it feels a little muddy, almost HDR-ish in the sand. That's where I'd focus my attention. Maybe reduce the contrast in the sky to better pair with the natural contrast of the sand.
Going b&w leaves behind the defining pastels, and also makes it difficult - though not impossible - to come up with an image that feels natural. Converting a WS image like the one above to high-contrast b&w will make it very easy to overcook - in general, we have an appreciation for higher contrast, but my very personal opinion is that high contrast just doesn't apply here. Maybe high-key/low contrast, though I'm not sure this image is a good candidate.
When I use the Nik filters, I use them sparingly...small percentages of each effect.
I will go back to ground 0 and start over.
Thanks again.
These images are really helpful. I usually use Nik's "remove color cast" on my WS images but I purposefully left all of the filter off. My last version is a bit blue.
Thanks again.
The greenish color cast is a NIkon thing. I owned the d200, d90, d700 and lived in the greenish color cast days. The d200 seemed the coolest of the cameras. The sensor is geared more to cooler white balance settings. It's my opinion that Nikon wants the Low Light customer, the photojournalist. You get a myriad of clean 2.8 lenses, clean high ISO's, low megapixels, killer autofocus, 4 cameras that shoot 5-8 frames per second.....and a cooler base White Balance.
However, you can pump up the WB into the K6000 to achieve the warmer landscape tonalities.
Just my opinion. Love Nikon. Miss my 14-24