[SI] B&W comments

I'll be briefer than I normally try to be for SI comments. Sorry about
that. I'll make some general comments and mention some standouts. If I
didn't mention your shots, please don't take offense.

In general, I really liked this mandate and think most of the submissions
were good. I even think it should be a recurring one - maybe every 6
months or year. I don't attempt B&W that often, unless it occurs to me
at PP time.

Ones I really liked:
- Bob Coe 3: like the fg interest and the exposure handled well with sky.
- Russell Stewart old: despite the blown highlights, it's clever use of
lines.
- Bill Boyce old: like the light streams, though not clear if it's a
church or something else.
- Bowser old 2: yeah - like these type of shots. Lines of the road
disappearing. Great.
- Simon Steel church: really liked this one
- Tony Cooper evil eye: street photography just lends itself to B&W,
doesn't it? Like it.
- Bowser old 1: texture and lines - like it.
- Bowser old 3: churches are great for B&W. Hey - I liked all 3 of your
submissions. You win.

Some critiques:
- R Durtschi: I reckon this could have been better if there was a bit
more of a side angle on the tractor. Just head on doesn't do it for me
personally, but I can see what you were going for.

Self critique:
- Troy Piggins 2: I wanted to take a shot specifically for this mandate.
Went for a walk around the city one morning, but many of the buildings I
had planned to shoot were in bad light and didn't get a chance to go back
in afternoon or night. I like this building's character. The old half,
and the "newer" half that looks very 1950's or 60's. The shot doesn't
necessarily do it for me.
- Troy Piggins old 1: Leeds Castle. Really liked this castle - spent a
whole day there and hundreds of photo opportunities. Maybe I like this
shot more because of the memories of the day. I do like the dramatic
sky.
I'm a bit bummed I couldn't get out more over the break to get more B&W
photos I had in mind but just didn't have the opportunity to execute.
Surpising how busy you end up being on holidays.

Some questions:
- D-Mac 2: What's that in the water behind the pelican? At first glance
I thought it could be a shark fin and the pelican was trying to escape.
That'd be a cool capture.
- RolLei Nut 2: Doesn't look B&W to me, just desaturated?
- Bret Douglas 2: who is that? Is it someone famous that I should know,
or just a friend?
- D-Mac girl with glasses headshot - Is this shot a ****take?

--
Troy Piggins
Gimme critique - I can take it

As usual, I'll comment only on what interested me.

Black and white can be very dramatic, but there's more to it than just
shooting in black and white or fully desaturating. Contrast is key.
Most of the photos that miss the mark miss because they are muddy and
without contrast.

Jim Kramer - all photos. Jim needs a new locale. His images are
always good, but they are getting "been there, done that".

Solomon Peachy - all photos except the rock. Mr Peachy comes up with
something from nothing more than most people, and always something
different.

D-Mac - First time I've seen his entries, although I know he's entered
in the past; before my time. After all the bashing D-Mac takes, I do
like his shots. That bird - pelican? - looks like it has a mask on.
Australian pelicans look different from what I'm used to. I like bird
with the funny hair-do, too. Something impudent and interesting about
her.

Parv- The flower part (never did study flower anatomy) is an
interesting choice for black and white.

Coe, Martha - The cupola shot irritates me. I have a very similar
shot, including a weathervane, but it misses. Seeing Martha's shot
shows me that mine misses because my roof is horizontal' cause I shot
straight on. Her angled roof makes the shot.

Coe, Bob - The waterfall is technically very good, but just too
calandar-like for me.

Durtschi - I really like that wood grain. Normally, I spit upon the
rule of thirds, but that knot-hole might be a little better placed a
little to the left.

Stewart - Great shot. Great. But why not something just for this
competition? The (old) shots make me feel like I'm getting
hand-me-downs. (Comment applies to the other (old) shots. Bill
Boyce's (old) was worth digging out, though.)

Chant - Like it. Good composition. Nik filter?

Steele - Overstrand - The sleeper of the month. One of those photos
you pass over and come back to. For PBase display, though, put a
white border on it. Contain the black.


Self-critique - The black and white cookies photo is the *worst* image
I've ever contributed anywhere. But I had to.

The black and white cookie, for those who don't know about them, are
cookies with a thick layer of dark chocolate and white chocolate icing
on top. Really thick. "Black and whites" are the name of the cookie,
and they are usually only available at Jewish deli bakery counters.
They are available only in one store in Orlando.

So, given the name, I purchased a half-dozen and set them up to be
photographed. Under lights. Hot lights. Two shots in, and the
chocolate started to get sticky. When I tried to move them around, I
got fingerprints on the chocolate, and it started to slough off. Then
they started to stick together. I ended up with horrible composition,
but they were a solid mass and no longer movable around.

I set them up on a workbench, and it was too high to really see in the
D40's viewfinder. I kept dicking around and the subject matter kept
melting. When I uploaded the card, I saw that black and white cookies
don't look good in black and white.

Screw it, though. I had too much time invested not to enter the
picture. I had much better choices to offer, but I can get stubborn.
If I'm going to suffer, so are you.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper wrote:



Chant - Like it. Good composition. Nik filter?


Thanks. Had several goes at that building from different angles. It is on
top of a mound on the end of a ridge, hard to avoid the falling over
backward look. Not tried to digitally correct. The only choice you get is
where to place the untidy bushes.

If by Nik filter you mean software no. Orange filter and b&w film. Then in
elderly version of photoshop I burnt the edges in a little. For
the "toning" I converted the image to RGB, duplicated layer. I adjusted
the curves on the individual channels on this top layer to get the effect I
wanted, actually something slightly more gaudy. I then set the layer to
overlay colour only and set the opacity to around 50%.

Perhaps pushing the SI rules a but, quoting:

"What's allowed? This is the hard part. Since we're focused on pictures
here, extensive digital manipulation would probably not be looked upon with
favor. Manipulations comparable to what those done in traditional
photographic processes would be appropriate."

So in my view - I did not do anything that was not reasonably possible in
the darkroom - had I a reasonable amount of skill and time.

I think it needed it. The sky that day was almost completely even and
uninteresting and the burning does draw the eye.




Self-critique - The black and white cookies photo is the *worst* image
I've ever contributed anywhere. But I had to.

Its nice and graphic, Its one of those graphic still life shots that I never
seem to do. I just don't seem to get the inspiration. Now I have read
your post I can see that they are starting to melt!

Pete


--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

Helen wrote,on my timestamp of 6/01/2009 6:40 PM:


key. Now that I'm using a new monitor that is properly calibrated,
I'm embarrassed of the b&w work I submitted in the past. They all
look washed out. I wish I could adjust the midtones and exposure but


Amazing. But when that was noted to you, it was the
result of "envy" and "deranged attacks" on your honesty
and ability as a photographer.
Ah well: stupidity shows limits, at last...

"Noons" wrote in message
...
Helen wrote,on my timestamp of 6/01/2009 6:40 PM:


key. Now that I'm using a new monitor that is properly calibrated,
I'm embarrassed of the b&w work I submitted in the past. They all
look washed out. I wish I could adjust the midtones and exposure but


Amazing. But when that was noted to you, it was the
result of "envy" and "deranged attacks" on your honesty
and ability as a photographer.
Ah well: stupidity shows limits, at last...



But what would you know about photography Noons?
You're just another Aussie wannabe aren't you?
One of the "deranged" ones I hope!
LOL.

God I love these Canucks and their ways. I just had a run in with pedantic
Pommie (almost as quaint) who gave his migrating mate some photos to use to
promote her business... On condition she include his UK web site in every
Australian advertisment!

Douglas
---
footnote:
The term Canuck is first recorded about 1835 as an Americanism, originally
referring specifically to a French Canadian. This was probably the original
meaning, though in Canada and other countries, "Canuck" refers to a
Canadian... From the Wiki of course!

"Helen" wrote in message
...
On Jan 6, 5:31 am, Noons wrote:
Helen wrote,on my timestamp of 6/01/2009 6:40 PM:

key. Now that I'm using a new monitor that is properly calibrated,
I'm embarrassed of the b&w work I submitted in the past. They all
look washed out. I wish I could adjust the midtones and exposure but

Amazing. But when that was noted to you, it was the
result of "envy" and "deranged attacks" on your honesty
and ability as a photographer.
Ah well: stupidity shows limits, at last...


Excuse me warmonger, but I have NEVER EVER dised someone's critique
whether good or bad. Mark T. often told me to have my monitor
calibrated and I wholeheartedly agreed. I even stated that the
exposure and midtones are off because of my monitor every time I
submitted, so keep your attempts at an argument to yourself. I'm not
biting, merely stating another one of your lies and attempts to
provoke wars which has nothing to do with photography.

For a moment there I thought some imposter had posted using your name. Glad
to see I was wrong. Now what do ya charge for pet troll work?

I recon I could do with a few glowing for comments crap photos every now and
then. I can pinch some of Brets if I can't find any of my own, he'll never
find out.

You never know, you might reverse the trend of paying someone to give them
comments into getting a buck for yourself (That's a b not an f). How about
it Helen? Wanna be my bitch for a while?

Douglas

Helen wrote,on my timestamp of 6/01/2009 10:50 PM:

key. Now that I'm using a new monitor that is properly calibrated,
I'm embarrassed of the b&w work I submitted in the past. They all
look washed out. I wish I could adjust the midtones and exposure but
Amazing. But when that was noted to you, it was the
result of "envy" and "deranged attacks" on your honesty
and ability as a photographer.
Ah well: stupidity shows limits, at last...

Excuse me warmonger,

I think you got me confused with your baby boy blue...

but I have NEVER EVER dised someone's critique
whether good or bad.

er....
Exactly what does that mean in English?


Mark T. often told me to have my monitor
calibrated and I wholeheartedly agreed.

It's not just him...

I even stated that the
exposure and midtones are off because of my monitor every time I
submitted, so keep your attempts at an argument to yourself.

Argument? It's you who is arguing that it doesn't matter.
Let me see: you recognize your images would have been stuffed because of the bad
calibration of your monitor, but you feel perfectly capable of passing judgement
and commenting on other's work with the SAME monitor?
So, the problem with your monitor ONLY shows up with your images? It does not
alter your perception of images made by others?
Amazing...


I'm not
biting, merely stating another one of your lies

Oh, it's MY lie and "war" that you don't know how to setup your monitor, and yet
you comment on other's work without even the most basic of calibrations or
baseline to start from? Sure...

provoke wars which has nothing to do with photography.

The only thing that has nothing to do with photography is your thought process...

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:19:57 +0000, Peter Chant
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:



Chant - Like it. Good composition. Nik filter?


Thanks. Had several goes at that building from different angles. It is on
top of a mound on the end of a ridge, hard to avoid the falling over
backward look. Not tried to digitally correct. The only choice you get is
where to place the untidy bushes.

If by Nik filter you mean software no.

It looks like a filter applied in post-processing with one of the Nik
Color Efex Pro filter apps. Looks good any way you did it.

Perhaps pushing the SI rules a but, quoting:

"What's allowed? This is the hard part. Since we're focused on pictures
here, extensive digital manipulation would probably not be looked upon with
favor. Manipulations comparable to what those done in traditional
photographic processes would be appropriate."

Fine with me.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

tony cooper wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:19:57 +0000, Peter Chant
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:



Chant - Like it. Good composition. Nik filter?


Thanks. Had several goes at that building from different angles. It is
on top of a mound on the end of a ridge, hard to avoid the falling over
backward look. Not tried to digitally correct. The only choice you get
is where to place the untidy bushes.

If by Nik filter you mean software no.

It looks like a filter applied in post-processing with one of the Nik
Color Efex Pro filter apps. Looks good any way you did it.

It would be even better if I could do it so it was consistent - however, as
I rarely put two images side by side that is not so much of an issue. I
think in my version you can save curve settings to a file, so it is a
matter of discipline. Anyway, thanks!


And much cheaper looking at the price of that package, if you add the cost
of Photoshop it all gets rather expensive!



Perhaps pushing the SI rules a but, quoting:

"What's allowed? This is the hard part. Since we're focused on pictures
here, extensive digital manipulation would probably not be looked upon
with favor. Manipulations comparable to what those done in traditional
photographic processes would be appropriate."

Fine with me.

Would have bulked at doing it if it were colour, but a little burning in
seems standard practise on B&W and in my opinion works wonders. IMHO it
works well with colour as well.

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:39:04 +0000, Peter Chant
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:19:57 +0000, Peter Chant
wrote:

tony cooper wrote:



Chant - Like it. Good composition. Nik filter?


Thanks. Had several goes at that building from different angles. It is
on top of a mound on the end of a ridge, hard to avoid the falling over
backward look. Not tried to digitally correct. The only choice you get
is where to place the untidy bushes.

If by Nik filter you mean software no.

It looks like a filter applied in post-processing with one of the Nik
Color Efex Pro filter apps. Looks good any way you did it.

It would be even better if I could do it so it was consistent - however, as
I rarely put two images side by side that is not so much of an issue. I
think in my version you can save curve settings to a file, so it is a
matter of discipline. Anyway, thanks!


And much cheaper looking at the price of that package, if you add the cost
of Photoshop it all gets rather expensive!

I recently purchased a Wacom Bamboo Fun Tablet. It came with the Nik
program, Corel Painter, and Elements 5.0 bundled. The total cost was
just over $90.
http://www.buy.com/retail/product.as...&dcaid =17902

I already had Photoshop v 7.0 and Elements 5.0, but I wanted the Nik
program and will let my daughter use the Corel Painter program.

I do like the Nik program. Quite a choice of post-processing filter
apps and the ability to save the settings.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida