But two versions, B&W or colour... opinion?

Note the background has been de-saturated a little...

B&W or colour?Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
B&W or colour?I like this photo but have put some work into it as it hasn't quite come off for me yet.
But two versions, B&W or colour... opinion? ![]() Note the background has been de-saturated a little... ![]() D3 | 18-200VR | 50:1.4 | 28:2.8 | 35-70 2.8 | 12-24 f4
picasaweb.google.com/JustinPhotoGallery "We don't know and we don't care"
I prefer the colour version. In my oppinion, in b&w it's difficult to see the subject because of it's highlights. In colour version the purple of the subject in contrast with the green of the background makes the subject shine.
- I hope to be clear. English isn't my best language. Sorry ![]()
Justin
Definitely the colour version for reasons which iposiniditos (in very good english BTW) has covered well. I'd also crop most of the RHS and turn this into a portrait crop. The RHS is very distracting for me and adds nothing to the image. Peter
Disclaimer: I know nothing about anything. *** smugmug galleries: http://www.stubbsy.smugmug.com ***
What Peter said.
g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
thanks all!
The softness is due to the 300mm lens at f4 plus I upped it a little with a ~7 pixel gaussian blur in PS, to help seperate the flower some more from the background. I'll try the portrait crop. If you want this as a wallpaper, grab this - http://justin.zenfolio.com/img/p736077081.jpg it's 800x533 D3 | 18-200VR | 50:1.4 | 28:2.8 | 35-70 2.8 | 12-24 f4
picasaweb.google.com/JustinPhotoGallery "We don't know and we don't care"
Maybe duotone or sepia?
Blog: http://grevgrev.blogspot.com
Deviantart: http://grebbin.deviantart.com Nikon: D700 / D70 / AiS 28mm f2 / AiS 35mm f1.4 / AiS 50mm f1.2 / AiS 180mm f2.8 ED / AFD 85mm f1.4 / Sigma 50mm f1.4 / Sigma 24-70 f2.8 macro / Mamiya 80mm f1.9 x2 /Mamiya 120mm f4 macro
Previous topic • Next topic
9 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|