The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
Another old file from over 20 years ago, this was taken in one of Donna’s gardens. I’ve included an unprocessed full frame copy of the original file for reference.
I never did anything with this file because I felt the saturation was “retina burning” and every time I looked at it, all I saw was yellow and green. I was never satisfied with my earlier attempts to process this file.
Over the last few weeks, I’ve been working on it again in LRC. My goal was to depict detail and texture, and to better develop the shadows on the petals. I concluded the best way to do so was a B&W conversion.
Additionally, the composition with the leaves in the LRC reminded me of the classic portrait pose of the model placing their hand under their chin, so instead of cropping them out or trying to blur them into the BG, I decided to develop them as an integral feature of this “dahlia portrait.”
To my eye the final result has a bit of “painterly feel” to it as well, which was not originally intended but further developed as I began recognizing it.
Specific Feedback
After all of these years, I think I have finally managed to develop this file into what I’ve been envisioning. Your feedback on the final result is appreciated!
Technical Details
EOS 10D on tripod
EF300 F4L
f/5.6 @ 1/100, ISO 100
Processed in LRC
Critique Template
Use of the template is optional, but it can help spark ideas.
The first thing that struck me about this image, Jim, was that when I flipped back and forth between the color and B&W versions what that when I switched to B&W it seemed to jump out at me. That’s partly the small crop off the bottom, but to me the B&W version definitely has more presence. I do find myself wishing the two foreground leaves were a bit crisper, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the conversion. I think you did a fine job of pulling out the texture and geometry of the flower in the conversion-not an easy thing to see, just looking at the original. The conversion also gave the flower a lot more depth which I like. All-in-all, an excellent processing job and a fine image.
Wonderful!! The B/W is a world of improvement! @Dennis_Plank said it all – texture and detail – “presence”. The “pose” of the original is wonderful and now you have brought out the best in the image. I love the OOF bits of light in the BG. My only small nit is the leaf tip touching the bottom of the frame. Adding a bit of canvas with content-aware fill would probably work well. Or burn down the tip.
Jim: I’m an avowed color junkie but the original color version is a nice documentary shot and interesting but the B&W emphasizes the details and interaction of the center with the petals so much better. I would give the color a passing glance but the B&W holds my attention. >=))>
I think accentuating the shadows contributes to giving the B&W version its “3D pop.” Even just reducing saturation, I struggled to get the same range of tone in the shadows and the same level of pop.
Once I had the B&W version ready to post, I tried converting it back to color and totally lost that effect. Working the saturation slider, the more saturation added, the more shadow tonal range turns into saturation range, with the shadows quickly becoming over saturated. Perhaps it’s the way the software works…or the way our vision perceives color.
In any case, I think the main take away is that B&W can often do a better job of conveying tonal range and subject detail, giving it a more 3D look.
Thanks again to all for taking the time to comment!
