Playing with grainModerators: 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
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Playing with grainI don't usually like grain or noise in colour images but I go through phases of liking and disliking grain in B/W but have not yet worked out which approach best suits my style of images (if indeed I have a *style*).
I would like some feedback on these three images, one with little grain, one with lots and one somewhere in the middle. Cheers
Bob in sunny Perth What gear? Watch this space!
Re: Playing with grain
Everyone has a style Bob. I think grain if used should help portray the message that you are giving. Perhaps it could be timelessness, old age or desolation. I am not convinced that excessive noise in a portrait could be that useful. For example in #2. The lady's face looks like it's blending into the wall which is also textured similarly. #3 I can only see grain in the background. It's a great moment that you have captured though.
Re: Playing with grainBob, to me the Grain in #2 looks artificial and adds little to the image.
The little grain in #3 seems to go with the subjects mood. D90 | D50 | Tamron 17-50 2.8| AF-S 18-55 DX (and VR) | Sigma 70 - 300 APO DG | 50mm 1.8 | SB-600
Re: Playing with grainthe last picture has the perfect mood! added with the desaturated black and white!
i love B&W photography!
Re: Playing with grain
grain is a technique/process that I reckon only works with a small portion of images, the composition and subject have to be just right, thinking back, I cannot recall the specific images, but I have only seen less than a handfull of digital images which have grain that I went 'wow'. I don't any of these images require an extra PP or in this case grain to give them the extra 'pop' more to the point I think none really suit grain application. The first image is very pleasant, invokes some thought in teh viewer (me anyway) and is a nice composition, I woudl however crop some of teh dead space on the bottom and right, this might also help balance the image? gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
Re: Playing with grain#1 could be improved with a softer light. Perhaps just a reflector, image right, to define the shape of the head.
Otherwise great photo. #2 Way too much noise here. She looks diseased. Or perhaps way too little. Iff you were going for a camouflage look. #3 this works much better. Perhaps a little more noise could be added, but only to the background. This is a photo that came up a few years ago that I felt made REALLY good use of noise. http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=33772&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a#p366205 Like others, I think that noise is a tool to be used sparingly if at all. Only use it: 1. if it is inherent in the picture & you can't get rid of it (Like BlacknStormys above) or 2. if it really suits the mood you are trying to portray. Then use just barely enough. Personally I would use it only if it met both criteria. If it only met #1 I would ditch the photo. This is one I took. http://www.dslrusers.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=39067&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a#p411503 The grain was inherent in the photo to start with. I removed it for the original post & put it back (i.e. started again from the original RAW) after feedback indicated it might be a good idea - and it was! Greg
It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
Re: Playing with grain
grain in the third really adds to the feel of the image, some form of emotional attachment or a remeniscent vibe. The grain is wonderfully presented to compliment the image rather than to be the main idea. I'll also agree with the dead space on the bottom and right of the first image, just my opinion anyways. Great judgement on grain though! Canon | Sony | Panasonic | Tamron | Sigma
My photography is still developing. Don't be so negative! http://www.photomarcs.com
Re: Playing with grainMr Darcy, they are two very fine examples, exactly what I was thinking of!
man some u old folk actually have pretty good memories... gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
Previous topic • Next topic
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|