pic

bribrius · Feb 9, 2014

The_Traveler · Feb 9, 2014

if the intended center of interest is the stuff on the far shore, composition is off, imo. poorly framed.
image as presented is flat and under processed.

I would demonstrate but your profile is marked as 'no edit'

bribrius · Feb 9, 2014

The_Traveler said:
if the intended center of interest is the stuff on the far shore, composition is off, imo. poorly framed.
image as presented is flat and under processed.

I would demonstrate but your profile is marked as 'no edit'

it has no center of interest. scenic shot. dulled near bw. framing, is intentional. flat and underprocessed. I might agree with you on this. I have another version I brought up the contrast, shadows and color in. im not sure which one I like better but the latter I wasn't really a large fan of either. I sent this one to get printed. Pick it up in a hour couple hours. if I don't like it, ill take your advice on the flat and underprocessed because I was kind of thinking the same thing. You just kind of concreted my own thoughts. I just don't have a good eye for this on what is "preferably". OR maybe I should just make it bw it is already 90 percent there?
Thanks.

The_Traveler · Feb 9, 2014

BW is not the solution for a dull, flat print.
You end up with a dull flat b&w.

bribrius · Feb 9, 2014

The_Traveler said:
BW is not the solution for a dull, flat print.
You end up with a dull flat b&w.

bring up the contrast and brighten it a little. not as dull. no??

StefanCo · Feb 9, 2014

I wouldn't go B&W. I would try to turn the grey more into white, lighten those up, and get more detail in the stones in the front. A lot of detail is lost because they are too dark.

bribrius · Feb 9, 2014

StefanCo said:
I wouldn't go B&W. I would try to turn the grey more into white, lighten those up, and get more detail in the stones in the front. A lot of detail is lost because they are too dark.

thanks