Posted by Peter Coskun on December 1, 2011 at 7:07 PM
I'm going to get this image printed soon, but I just don't know if I should print the color version or the black and white. I like both, but am only going to get one print done of this scene. Here's the color version.
Posted by Peter Coskun on December 1, 2011 at 7:07 PM
black and white
Posted by Adam Schallau on December 1, 2011 at 7:08 PM
My vote is for the color version.
Posted by Pam Colander on December 1, 2011 at 7:17 PM
Make that two for color, pretty scene. What size you making?
Posted by Jack Garrett on December 1, 2011 at 7:27 PM
Color, and just a tad brighter.
Posted by D J Kuklinski on December 1, 2011 at 7:40 PM
B&W for me.
Posted by Peter Coskun on December 1, 2011 at 7:51 PM
Color is winning so far, Pam I'm making this a 16x24
Posted by Erik Aagaard on December 1, 2011 at 8:26 PM
Gotta go with color. The brilliant green grass just isn't translating to a compelling black and white image - not enough tonal range, I think.
Posted by Ken Wyatt on December 1, 2011 at 11:34 PM
Better adjust the exposure and/or brightness. Both seem very blocked up in the shadow areas. Shouldn't those clouds be white?
Posted by Kane Engelbert on December 2, 2011 at 10:35 PM
I like the color version ALOT better. However your B&W version has better dynamic range/better shadow detail on the peaks. If you go color, look close at the shadow detail in the upper 3rd of the image.
The way I view the color version now, my eye is drawn to the foreground first, then the rugged peaks. Sure the foreground including the nice fence is cool but the image loses my eye in an important area; the cool yellow horizontal stripe (I would make that yellow POP), and then the peaks. The sky is great btw.
Most shoot the Tetons because they are stunning, and because these rugged peaks easily anchor an image, where everything else is just details. For me the Foreground and Sky anchors this image due to minor lack of dynamic range in the upper 3rd.
Just my two cents. I'm nitpicking, but you said you were printing!!
Kane
Posted by Jeff Hackett on December 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM
I prefer the color version, there's just not enough tonal separation in the entire foreground of the B&W. The color version really holds my attention much longer.
Posted by Joshua Hardin on December 5, 2011 at 1:26 PM
My pick is the color version. Those greens really pop nicely! However, I find when I'm converting images with lots of greens into B&W those photos usually have almost an overwhelming amount of the same range of midtones at first. This gives it a sort of "muddy" appearance. That's happened a little bit to your B&W here IMO, but it has some great potential. With a little bit of work to selectively add some more contrast to the grasses in the foreground, I think the B&W could really pop too.
Discussion
13 repliesThe way I view the color version now, my eye is drawn to the foreground first, then the rugged peaks. Sure the foreground including the nice fence is cool but the image loses my eye in an important area; the cool yellow horizontal stripe (I would make that yellow POP), and then the peaks. The sky is great btw.
Most shoot the Tetons because they are stunning, and because these rugged peaks easily anchor an image, where everything else is just details. For me the Foreground and Sky anchors this image due to minor lack of dynamic range in the upper 3rd.
Just my two cents. I'm nitpicking, but you said you were printing!!
Kane