B&W (and also some sepia) C&C

[fjrabon]

Exactly three weeks since I started photography!

All Shots Nikon D3100 and circular polarized filter all roughly between 3 and 5 PM, Augusta, GA, perfectly clear skies

1.


DSC_0003 by franklinrabon, on Flickr

35 mm, ISO 100, f/4, 1/1250; converted to sepia and cropped and straightened slightly in aperture.

2.



DSC_0017 by franklinrabon, on Flickr

35 mm, ISO 100, f/4, 1/640; converted to sepia and cropped and straightened in aperture.

3.




DSC_0028 by franklinrabon, on Flickr

35 mm, ISO 100, f/4, 1/320 cropped and converted to B&W in aperture, using the Red filter B&W filter conversion

4.


DSC_0189 by franklinrabon, on Flickr

35 mm, ISO 400, f/3.5, 1/1000 converted to B&W with green filter B&W conversion and cropped in aperture

5.


DSC_0196 by franklinrabon, on Flickr

55-200mm @ 90mm, f/4.5, ISO 400 1/1000 cropped and converted to B&W in aperture using high contrast B&W filter.

 

[dots]

Good effort! Compositions like 3 and 4 i think are working well. 4 for me has the most going for it artistically. As you seem a quick learner with using apps like Aperture i suggest you also read as much as you can from websites like luminouslandscape, normankoren, thomhogan, cambridgeincolor for a mix of technical info and hands-on commentary.

 

[mommy-medic]

I love Augusta! There are sooooo many photo ops. (it's the oldest city in GA). I am going there tomorrow to pick up my soldier from ft gordon. Maybe I'll see what I can shoot while I'm there.

I like your shots (but the statue and shrubbery one I'm perplexed by?). I'm sorry I don't know enough to offer much more than that.

 

[MTVision]

I think #1 would look better, IMO, if the sky wasn't so dark. Everything is pretty close to the same color except for a few spots on the building. Usually the shadows are the darkest color, then the mistimes a little lighter and the highlights should have little to no color tone. I like the way the building is colored but the sky just looks off.

 

[fjrabon]

I think #1 would look better, IMO, if the sky wasn't so dark. Everything is pretty close to the same color except for a few spots on the building. Usually the shadows are the darkest color, then the mistimes a little lighter and the highlights should have little to no color tone. I like the way the building is colored but the sky just looks off.

Yeah, I probably overdid the circular polarized filter a bit, which lead to the dark sky, which would maybe have worked if there were white clouds instead of crystal clear skies. I think when I put the lens hood on I accidentally shifted the filter to its max setting. I didn't notice until later. I could maybe try to dodge it in Aperture, but I guess I'm happy enough with the sky there to leave it?

 

[fjrabon]

I like your shots (but the statue and shrubbery one I'm perplexed by?).

I was trying to capture the statue's slightly bowed head with the cross in the background, which was nicely naturally framed by the shrubs. Not saying I pulled it off, but that's what I was going for.

 

[MTVision]

Yeah, I probably overdid the circular polarized filter a bit, which lead to the dark sky, which would maybe have worked if there were white clouds instead of crystal clear skies. I think when I put the lens hood on I accidentally shifted the filter to its max setting. I didn't notice until later. I could maybe try to dodge it in Aperture, but I guess I'm happy enough with the sky there to leave it?

The typo in my original reply was suppose to be midtones not mistimes.

If your happy with the sky then that's fine. I just meant with a sepia conversion it's usually dark color in shadows, lighter in midtones then little to no color in highlights. I don't know what the original image looks like but I was assuming the sky was quite a bit lighter then it is in the conversion.

 

[fjrabon]

Yeah, I probably overdid the circular polarized filter a bit, which lead to the dark sky, which would maybe have worked if there were white clouds instead of crystal clear skies. I think when I put the lens hood on I accidentally shifted the filter to its max setting. I didn't notice until later. I could maybe try to dodge it in Aperture, but I guess I'm happy enough with the sky there to leave it?

The typo in my original reply was suppose to be midtones not mistimes.

If your happy with the sky then that's fine. I just meant with a sepia conversion it's usually dark color in shadows, lighter in midtones then little to no color in highlights. I don't know what the original image looks like but I was assuming the sky was quite a bit lighter then it is in the conversion.

ha, that's what I figured anyway with the midtones.

Yeah, I mean I'm not so in love with image #1 that I really want to pour in an hour dodge the sky to get it just right. But I'm also happy enough with it to be okay with leaving it like it is. It's in kind of that middle ground to me. I mean I still want advice on it, more so I know how to fix it next time in advance, in the camera. But I don't think I'll actually fix that particular image any more than it is via PP software.

The original image has a pretty dark sky, the circular polarized filter was at its max setting, which I didn't realize for several shots (and well after I had changed subjects). Also, the image was exposed for the front of the building, which was in direct bright sunlight. Which dramatically darkened the sky.

 

[MTVision]

ha, that's what I figured anyway with the midtones.

Yeah, I mean I'm not so in love with image #1 that I really want to pour in an hour dodge the sky to get it just right. But I'm also happy enough with it to be okay with leaving it like it is. It's in kind of that middle ground to me. I mean I still want advice on it, more so I know how to fix it next time in advance, in the camera. But I don't think I'll actually fix that particular image any more than it is via PP software.

The original image has a pretty dark sky, the circular polarized filter was at its max setting, which I didn't realize for several shots (and well after I had changed subjects). Also, the image was exposed for the front of the building, which was in direct bright sunlight. Which dramatically darkened the sky.

Yeah I don't blame you for not wanting to fix it. I've never used aperture before - it definitely wouldn't take too long in cs5.

I usually do sepia conversion by doing split toning in adobe camera raw and only adding color to the shadows or change it to grayscale in photoshop and add a gradient/fill layer. In photoshop you can just mask out what you don't want.

The best advice for conversions - get the exposure correct in camera or at least make your exposure correct in post. Conversions always look best on perfectly exposed images.

 

[fjrabon]

Yeah I don't blame you for not wanting to fix it. I've never used aperture before - it definitely wouldn't take too long in cs5.

I usually do sepia conversion by doing split toning in adobe camera raw and only adding color to the shadows or change it to grayscale in photoshop and add a gradient/fill layer. In photoshop you can just mask out what you don't want.

The best advice for conversions - get the exposure correct in camera or at least make your exposure correct in post. Conversions always look best on perfectly exposed images.

well, it probably shouldn't take me that long in Aperture, but I have three things going there:

1) I don't know photography well enough yet to really know exactly the best way to fix things. I can look at a photo and kind of intuitively know 'that seems off' but I haven't gotten to the point of knowing exactly how it's off and especially not immediately how to fix it. So even after I recognize that the sky is off, it's probably like an hour of playing with things to even begin to figure out how to fix it.

2) Even when I do actually know how to do something I usually am far from efficient in knowing the quickest, easiest, faster, yet best way to fix it. I probably do lots of things the most roundabout way possible that there's some quick and easy way to do it.

3) I'm too much of a perfectionist. I'm roughly okay with just doing a sepia conversion and saying, 'yeah, that's fine for that photograph' but once i start diving in to even moderate PP work, I cannot stop until I'm just exhausted with the image.

The other issue for that particular picture is that I was hoping to get some advice on how to better shoot that kind of shot in the camera as well. How to properly expose the front of a building in direct 4 PM sunlight, without making the sky seem too dark. If I had pre-edited it, people probably don't comment on the exposure.

I think one thing I learned from that picture, when combined with #3 is that you shouldn't blend a dramatic sky with an otherwise natural looking shot. #3 the sky is way darker than #1, but since #3 is pretty dramatic as is, due to the red filter B&W conversion, the darkened, dramatic sky works. But with #1, since the rest of the building is roughly natural looking, the dramatic sky just seems off. I hadn't actually read this in any composition articles or books, but it seems to make sense. You can shoot dramatic, you can shoot natural, but don't try to mix the two together.

 

[MTVision]

well, it probably shouldn't take me that long in Aperture, but I have three things going there:

1) I don't know photography well enough yet to really know exactly the best way to fix things. I can look at a photo and kind of intuitively know 'that seems off' but I haven't gotten to the point of knowing exactly how it's off and especially not immediately how to fix it. So even after I recognize that the sky is off, it's probably like an hour of playing with things to even begin to figure out how to fix it.

2) Even when I do actually know how to do something I usually am far from efficient in knowing the quickest, easiest, faster, yet best way to fix it. I probably do lots of things the most roundabout way possible that there's some quick and easy way to do it.

3) I'm too much of a perfectionist. I'm roughly okay with just doing a sepia conversion and saying, 'yeah, that's fine for that photograph' but once i start diving in to even moderate PP work, I cannot stop until I'm just exhausted with the image.

The other issue for that particular picture is that I was hoping to get some advice on how to better shoot that kind of shot in the camera as well. How to properly expose the front of a building in direct 4 PM sunlight, without making the sky seem too dark. If I had pre-edited it, people probably don't comment on the exposure.

I think one thing I learned from that picture, when combined with #3 is that you shouldn't blend a dramatic sky with an otherwise natural looking shot. #3 the sky is way darker than #1, but since #1 is pretty dramatic as is, due to the red filter B&W conversion, the darkened, dramatic sky works. But with #1, since the rest of the building is roughly natural looking, the dramatic sky just seems off. I hadn't actually read this in any composition articles or books, but it seems to make sense. You can shoot dramatic, you can shoot natural, but don't try to mix the two together.

I'm not 100% sure how to tell you to expose for the building but....maybe try exposing for the highlights on the building then you may have to fix exposure in PP. Don't take my word for it though

More advice...please don't take it the wrong way. I found that as a beginner it's better to stay away from conversions and gimmicky editing (selective color). Your conversions aren't bad but it's always better to learn how to do a clean edit perfectly first. Clean edit is basically fixing exposure, color, etc. It helps when you do start getting into conversions and photo effects. Learning how to do a clean edit will also make you a more efficient at editing and will help you see what is wrong and how to fix it. Just my opinion and what has worked for me!

 

[fjrabon]

I'm not 100% sure how to tell you to expose for the building but....maybe try exposing for the highlights on the building then you may have to fix exposure in PP. Don't take my word for it though

More advice...please don't take it the wrong way. I found that as a beginner it's better to stay away from conversions and gimmicky editing (selective color). Your conversions aren't bad but it's always better to learn how to do a clean edit perfectly first. Clean edit is basically fixing exposure, color, etc. It helps when you do start getting into conversions and photo effects. Learning how to do a clean edit will also make you a more efficient at editing and will help you see what is wrong and how to fix it. Just my opinion and what has worked for me!

no, definitely, thanks for the advice!

Yeah, that's probably most of my photos, However, due to the harsh mid day lighting, I felt that most of these worked better in stark B&W or sepia, especially with the sort of decaying mill look going. I love that sort of 'decaying Americana' type genre (I just made that up, does that sort of genre have an actual name?) in black and white. I also do a decent amount of editing pictures people post on here for myself, just to get more practice with that as well. I tend to shoot color during golden hours and B&W from like 10-5. I think I've only used selective color once, which was a brownish red dog, with a background of fallen leaves, that without selective coloring, he just blended in. It's definitely a pretty hackneyed look at this point. I kind of go through fits and spurts. I'll go a few days and just accumulate hundred, if not htousands of photos, then I'll go a few days where I only take a handful of shots each day, but spend hours doing PP. I like both aspects of photography, but I kind of have to be in the mood for each. There are days when I'm in a PP mood, and there are days when I'm in a shooting mood.

 

[KenC]

Interesting set. The toning is much too heavy in the first two. I agree with some that #4 is the best image for the reasons you stated, although I would crop a little on the left to remove some empty space and decenter the figure a little more. #3 needs some perspective correction (don't know if Aperture does that). #5 is nice, but looks a little "muddy" usually indicating low contrast. I don't know what kind of high contrast filter you used, but it looks like the upper midtone/lower highlight area needs to be lighter. At any rate, try reprocessing the original without using any presets from the software and see what you can do with it.