This is a good picture. But why does this work as a hc?
In such a simple picture, is the viewer engaged with anything other than observing a light fixture? What would make it better? I'd say the veiwer needs something to compare/contrast with the fixture. How about leaving in the clouds. Then the viewer can see the cross that is formed and compare them to the clouds and s/he might think about heaven, mortality, Jesus, the physical world as opposed to the spritual world or any number of other things.
Just as an illustration of how far it's possible to go, here's my high-contrast, reversed, "On the Beach" entry (may God have mercy on it) followed by the original exposure and a high-contrast B/W version of that.
Note that the B/w is not basic-editing legal, because I used a sky gradient; if I'd left the sky bright, it would be basic-legal. I'm not saying this is "good" high contrast, but it's extreme :-)
R.
I prefer this one to the doomed challenge entry (though I did find that one very appropriate to the challenge theme). Did you use the challenge entry as the source - ie the one before the desat? If not, can you post what you hue/sat'd to before you desat'd?
I do like the curves method, and there's always the brightness/contrast method, but as I'm quite new to "high contrast", are there other methods to explore? Any examples to share?
But why would we ever go to HIGH contrast? I agree that additional contrast is required out of camera.
In general, extreme high contrast will reduce a composition to its essentials. It's a form of abstraction, pure black and white with very little else. It's a very tricky process to work with. It basically requires a very strong, elemental composition to begin with, and one in which the details contribute little to the overall impact desired. I almost never work in extreme high contrast, although I used to way back in the day with the Kodak Ortho graphic arts films.
One practical reason for doing high contrast images is if they are going to be the source image for 1 or 2-color silkscreening, for example. I really don't have a lot to say about the technique, unfortunately. I never have really gotten into it for photgraphic purposes, just as an interim step in graphic arts production.
I prefer this one to the doomed challenge entry (though I did find that one very appropriate to the challenge theme). Did you use the challenge entry as the source - ie the one before the desat? If not, can you post what you hue/sat'd to before you desat'd?
Unfortunately I can't; I was just noodling around and didn't save the interim steps :-(
I prefer this one to the doomed challenge entry (though I did find that one very appropriate to the challenge theme). Did you use the challenge entry as the source - ie the one before the desat? If not, can you post what you hue/sat'd to before you desat'd?
Unfortunately I can't; I was just noodling around and didn't save the interim steps :-(
R.
Well, OK. I'll forgive you this time, but let's not let it happen again, mmm'K? :-)
By the way, are you going to be home the 29th-30th of September, by any chance?
By the way, are you going to be home the 29th-30th of September, by any chance?
I would imagine I will be, yes: I'll be in Oregon the beginning of the month for a few days, and that's all the traveling I'll be able to afford for the month of September. Why? You gonna come calling?
By the way, are you going to be home the 29th-30th of September, by any chance?
I would imagine I will be, yes: I'll be in Oregon the beginning of the month for a few days, and that's all the traveling I'll be able to afford for the month of September. Why? You gonna come calling?
R.
There's a distinct possibility, yes. I might have to be in Boston on business that Wednesday through Friday afternoon. Still working the details, but I'll let you know. :-)
There's a distinct possibility, yes. I might have to be in Boston on business that Wednesday through Friday afternoon. Still working the details, but I'll let you know. :-)
Oh, goody! Will you have a car, or what? If you're going to fly up and rent a car, and then come to the Cape, look into flying into Providence and driving to Boston. The airport access up there is a mess right now, with the Big Dig tunnel collapse. If no car, you can take a passenger ferry from Boston to Provincetown...
Thought I'd play along, this is not much to look at...some press from 1770 (I think they pressed people in it) at the Presidio in SanDag. This one just seemed to fit the discussion.
Anyhoo...I like to start with a HC photo from the start (many times HC will save some improperly exposed shots).
In Digital Image Pro my steps:
Straighten (I'm a left handed Virgo I straighten everything)
crop
Initial Sharpen
Levels - bring in the bottom sliders to fit the histogram.
Curves - bring inwards the top/bottom handles to steppen the angle for more contrast.
Convert to B/W
I like soft in this situation so I did a Gaussian Layer @ 18 and made 48% transparent and flattened.
Curves (luminosity) - again to deepen the darks.
Curves (Blue channel) - (the opposite of blue is yellow) bring the blue channel down to add a yellowish tone (basically change the tone)
Resize
For web sharpen
Save (for web)
There's a distinct possibility, yes. I might have to be in Boston on business that Wednesday through Friday afternoon. Still working the details, but I'll let you know. :-)
Oh, goody! Will you have a car, or what? If you're going to fly up and rent a car, and then come to the Cape, look into flying into Providence and driving to Boston. The airport access up there is a mess right now, with the Big Dig tunnel collapse. If no car, you can take a passenger ferry from Boston to Provincetown...
Thought I'd play along, this is not much to look at...some press from 1770
I really like the B&W version.
I'm having a hard time putting my finger on why, though.
I think it's just that color distracts from the basic forms, so when it's not especially important visually, it ends up subtracting from the overall impression.
here are a couple older shots from my portfolio that I already had. are these high contrast enough? or where is line from normal contrast to high contrast is really what I'm wondering.
Tried out high contrast on this shot I took this morning because I feel it brings out the textures and emphasizes the busy composition.
Oh and for processing, I converted to B& white with channel mixer, adjusted levels, played with curves, burned the midtones & shadows until they were quite contrasty, sharpened and saved.
Is this kind of description what you're going for with this thread?
I don't know, maybe I'm just an extremist. :) I like my high contrast to be really high contrast. Maybe its really high key?
Okay, I just went to educate myself (where's American_Horse when you need him?) And high-key is low contrast while low-key is high contrast. Both are based on lighting scenes.
reworked my desolate entry too. just added a curves adjustment
This is terrific!
I'm starting to get an idea of what high contrast does: it takes whatever message or emotion you're trying to convey and makes it starker.
In this case, where the message was abandonment, I think the high contrast version is more powerful. The brighter sky is even more different from the building and the shadows virtually scream "hidden secrets from long ago."
I wish to know the opinion on this one,if somebody could comment:
This picture's shapes are interesting, and I think the high contrast contributes to that.
The brightness in the umbrellas, the sky, and the sky's reflection on the ground are stark against the dark people and the tree.
Details from a lower-contrast shot would distract from that starkness.
On the flip side, if there's anything interesting going with the people, like if someone were wincing from trying to stay dry, this treatment doesn't convey it. So, as always, there are choices about what you want to show.
Tried out high contrast on this shot I took this morning because I feel it brings out the textures and emphasizes the busy composition.
Oh and for processing, I converted to B& white with channel mixer, adjusted levels, played with curves, burned the midtones & shadows until they were quite contrasty, sharpened and saved.
Is this kind of description what you're going for with this thread?
That's exactly what we need to see, yes. Both the steps you took and what YOU think about it. Does it work better than in color or lower-contrast B&W? What were you trying to convey when taking it? Does any one of the three options convey that better or worse? So could you also post the original for comparison?
Also, please try to link the original to the edited one to make it easy to jump back and forth.
The idea here isn't that everything looks better in high contrast B&W, but rather to discover allows us to do as one tool in our toolbox.
As for commenting ont he photo itself, I agree with dahkota. Now the the emphasis is on shapes and textures.
I wonder what it'd look like pushed even further? I'm not saying it'd be better, just curious.
I wish to know the opinion on this one,if somebody could comment:
High Contrast in this situation does well to present a faceless crowd in a dark and gloomy (rain) situation. Gives a feeling of despair.
The only things that I might have done differently would be to straighten (vertically) on the corner of the building that is dead center/top of the shot... this would take away some of the leaning of the people in the foreground appear to have.
The other thing that I might do would be a 6x4ish crop having the hose start in the bottom right corner and leading us inward. The tree reflection is somewhat interesting but not a value add to the shot. Cropping that out might make the shot brighter in the foreground giving a light to dark lead in.
Here's my attempt at B&W high contrast. This was done in PS, but I am still going to try shooting high contrast out of the camera for this group.
The minimal editing steps that I performed and the progression photos are in the details section of photo. Let me know what you think.
First, thanks for the terrific explanation and links to the other shots! That's a terrific tool for helping others follow along.
I think this particular photo is a great example of what the various versions do for you. Of course, you start from a nicely composed, nicely exposed, nicely focused shot. Let's not forget the fundamentals here.
Here's my reaction to each shot:
Color: an old barn, but not especially decrepit. It's a nice day, enjoying some time in the country. Emotion: calm, happiness, generally enjoying life. It might benefit from some higher contrast, but not to extremes. Details I'm drawn to: the shape of the barn against the sky, a little texture in the barn, the hay bales.
Initial B&W: kind of bland; while in the color version the sky contrasted with the barn and the ground, here they all kind of blend together. Emotions: tired, end of day, ready to go home. I notice the sky darkening in a way I didn't in the original, which suggests the end of the day to me. I realize intellectually that it's just the usual sky lightening near the horizon, but emotionally, that's the effect. Details I'm drawn to: not much, actually. Mostly the shadow line under the roof.
High contrast B&W: ZAP! I immediately zoom in on the textures in the wood, the way the loft door stands out against the grain, and how the main door is falling off its hinges. The sky seems ominous now. The hay bales fade out of view. The barn's upper wood stands out against the lower stones. I wonder what's hidden in that shadow on the left and over in the very dark woods. Emotions: a little afraid, like the barn's probably haunted. And the sky makes me worry a storm's coming. Finally I feel a little sad for this barn that's falling apart.
I'm not saying the high contrast version is better than the color version, necessarily. It just conveys different things, and the high contrast version affects me more strongly. The initial B&W is definitely the "tamest" of the three, and wouldn't hold my interest for very long.
I don't know, maybe I'm just an extremist. :) I like my high contrast to be really high contrast. Maybe its really high key?
Okay, I just went to educate myself (where's American_Horse when you need him?) And high-key is low contrast while low-key is high contrast. Both are based on lighting scenes.
Hmm. I'm not sure it's quite that. Bear_Music said something about keys being opposite of high contrast, so you two together inspired me to go find a dictionary (I'm clueless myself).
The overall impression I've gotten is that keys are more about focusing on one end or the other (high=light, low=dark) with small areas of the other one. But those other areas can either contrast sharply or slightly.
I'd be very interested to read what you found - can you share the URL?
On to your photos:
I like the shot overall. The high contrast makes the sky blend into the water, so at first glance the boats appear to be floating on air. Is that what you intended? It's an interesting effect.
My emotional reaction is to be left wanting: wanting to see more detail, wanting to see more in the picture in general. Not necessarily a bad thing - just how it affects me.
This is a great example of where the high contrast conveys feelings similar to what you put in your description. I didn't get the full detail you wrote up, but I definitely understood the idea of being alone, with no clear idea what's out there.
I wonder whether it'd convey it even more to crop it more to the left, so you see less dock and more emptiness on the left?
