Hi Ray! The thing that strikes me about the monochromes you've posted recently is the high contrast. Obviously that's a stylistic choice, and shouldn't a priori be judged as good or bad in itself. For my tastes, though (and I do have a preference for subtlety and understatement generally), the contrast is just too high in these images. I wouldn't do CC on a portfolio, where I either give praise when I think it's due, or don't comment. However, since you ask...
In this image, for instance the sky is jet black. Like the majority of photographers, I think that large areas of pure black don't "work" in many images, except silhouettes. Non-photographers don't share that bias so much, so it's not necessarily a question of pure aesthetics. This image is well conceived and composed, but could yield a wonderful richness of midtones in the vegetation, ground and clouds. It would work in a high-key or low-key rendition.
Your work is impressive in other respects, but the contrast alone has led me to refrain from comment until now..
I'd be interested in your response. I don't mean to deter you, and would genuinely love to see what you could come up with.
Getting there, but there are still largeish areas of pure black that draw my attention in a not-so-good way, Ray. However, that's just my personal reaction.
your second posting is in my opinion more pleasing to the eye. to me both images appear to be over sharpened, however the second shot, I assume a different picture is much easier to look at. I tend to agree with Chris about the pure black in the sky and think that it could be toned down in both pictures. I also notice that in both pictuers that you have some blown highlights in the sky which you may want to try and clone out. Compositionally both pictures work well with the road leading into the cloud bank, and have the potential to be nice wall hangers if that is what you are after.
I don't get blown-out highlights, only maxed-out shadows from downloading any of these three of Ray's images, John. Still there in the last one, esp.upper left sky area.
Yes Ray, I like that better. dont mean to nitpik but I would put the dark back in the grass area like in your second photo, I think that they are necessary componets for your composition Hope that you don't mind I have circled the areas that I was calling blown highlights. May just be my computer.
how do you like it now compared to your first presentation? I think it is better but it is your picture and you have to be happy with it or it will never see the light of day. If it were mine at this point I would probably get a print made and live with it for a few days just to see how it holds up
Hi Ray! The thing that strikes me about the monochromes you've posted recently is the high contrast. Obviously that's a stylistic choice, and shouldn't a priori be judged as good or bad in itself. For my tastes, though (and I do have a preference for subtlety and understatement generally), the contrast is just too high in these images. I wouldn't do CC on a portfolio, where I either give praise when I think it's due, or don't comment. However, since you ask...
In this image, for instance the sky is jet black. Like the majority of photographers, I think that large areas of pure black don't "work" in many images, except silhouettes. Non-photographers don't share that bias so much, so it's not necessarily a question of pure aesthetics. This image is well conceived and composed, but could yield a wonderful richness of midtones in the vegetation, ground and clouds. It would work in a high-key or low-key rendition.
Your work is impressive in other respects, but the contrast alone has led me to refrain from comment until now..
I'd be interested in your response. I don't mean to deter you, and would genuinely love to see what you could come up with.
Like this???
Getting there, but there are still largeish areas of pure black that draw my attention in a not-so-good way, Ray. However, that's just my personal reaction.
your second posting is in my opinion more pleasing to the eye. to me both images appear to be over sharpened, however the second shot, I assume a different picture is much easier to look at. I tend to agree with Chris about the pure black in the sky and think that it could be toned down in both pictures. I also notice that in both pictuers that you have some blown highlights in the sky which you may want to try and clone out. Compositionally both pictures work well with the road leading into the cloud bank, and have the potential to be nice wall hangers if that is what you are after.
its the same photo. I just illuminate the blue more to show more of the sky. I will try to fix the highlighted areas.
like this one
I don't get blown-out highlights, only maxed-out shadows from downloading any of these three of Ray's images, John. Still there in the last one, esp.upper left sky area.
In some black and whites. You want a strong amount of black in it. Thats where is was going. I am not going to change that.
Yes Ray, I like that better. dont mean to nitpik but I would put the dark back in the grass area like in your second photo, I think that they are necessary componets for your composition Hope that you don't mind I have circled the areas that I was calling blown highlights. May just be my computer.
like this
how do you like it now compared to your first presentation? I think it is better but it is your picture and you have to be happy with it or it will never see the light of day. If it were mine at this point I would probably get a print made and live with it for a few days just to see how it holds up