Hi Tim, thank you so much for doing this! I’ve little experience with photography competitions, so I’m really enjoying your feedback on the submitted images.
I note in your rules for Natural Landscape Photography that black and white conversions are allowed, but that the light needs to be true to the original scene (if I’m understanding correctly). I find this tricky in black and white images, because of how strong the different options for both conversion and processing can be.
I’ll include the jpg the camera took along with the raw image; the jpg is true to the raw. Does this image fit the Golden Rule in your opinion, or do the contrast adjustments go too far? Any other feedback is appreciated as well.
Aesthetic: Feedback on the overall visual appeal of the image, including its color, lighting, cropping, and composition.
Emotional: Feedback on the emotional impact and artistic value of the image.
Specific Feedback and Self-Critique
When I took this image in 2019 I was new to both winter photography and black and white conversions. The mountain never fully cleared, but the sun trying to peek into that scene was a beautiful time to be out with the camera and I hoped to capture a bit of the moment. Experiencing the beauty and bringing some of it home are two different things. Does this image fit with your experience of photography competitions? Any and all suggestions for improvement are appreciated.
Technical Details
Sony RX100 (handheld)
10.4 mm (26 mm equivalent)
1/1000 sec. at f/11 and ISO 125
I’ll be honest - the color version doesn’t do much for me. The b&w, however…yowza! The brighter snow pops and though it may be a figment of my imagination, there seems to be more texture throughout the image. The clouds also have much more detail and contrast, which adds tremendously to the overall mood. Absolutely breathtaking!
Hi John, I agree with @Bret_Edge, the B&W version is sensational. I usually am not too fond of toned B&W, but this one works nicely. It also looks great as a strictly B&W too.
B&W or color? As posted, the B&W is far better. I also like that you cropped the right side eliminating the tall tree. That being said, I assume you posted the JPEG with no post processing and, having viewed some of your color snow images from earlier postings, wonder if processing it might add some of that pop bringing it a little closer to the quality of the outstanding B&W.
My apologies, I wasn’t clear enough about that color version. I was eager for Tim’s input on how “The integrity of the subject should be maintained.” when it comes to black and white conversions, and included the color version so Tim would know what the image had started with and not as a competitor for the black and white. The color version is straight from the camera.
I did play with processing the color version, but was never happy with the balance of blue on the left of the mountain and the lack thereof on the right. I knew that if I converted to black and white I could make those more symmetrical, so I headed in that direction. The question is, did I lose the integrity in the process and I’m hoping Tim can weigh in especially in relation to the Natural Landscape Photography Awards.
I’ve never entered a competition of that sort, and would hate to have an image disqualified when I could have avoided it.
I wouldn’t worry to much about the ‘light’ comment on our rules. This is more aimed at people who try to create new light that wasn’t there in the original image. It’s accepted that you’ll dodge and burn an image, even more so in black and white.
What you’ve done here is lovely though. A beautiful layering of foreground structure and the tonal range is perfect. What really sets it off for me is how the sky brings a connection with the snow pillows in the foreground though. This elevates it from ‘nice photo’ to ’ yeah that’s worthy of going past the first round’.
It’s a question I ask myself when I’m working on my own photos or compositions. You’ve got the primary composition and structure but then ask yourself ‘but what else is there’. If I can answer that question at least a couple of times, I know I’m onto something interesting.
A really nice image and the changes you’ve made fit well within the rules of the competition as the lighting hasn’t been distorted - only enhanced a bit …
p.s. You could even use a bit of selective colour tweaking to lighten the tone of the areas that are blue in the colour image, just like you might with a black and white filter and film.
Just chiming in to say I love this photo. The monochrome conversion looks amazing. The light is lickable. Really tremendous. The original photo looks under exposed to me, but recoverable as you have obviously done. Just terrific.
Thank you again Tim! Your website has some great color examples, but I wasn’t exactly sure how that would run with black and white; your comments are very helpful. I like your processing suggestion too; I’ll play with that.
I had not explored your website until your critiques here, but looking at past winners and the images posted here for your review an impression that really stands out to me is the originality portion of the “originality, composition, and complementary editing” noted on the website. (It’s not that composition and editing are less important, it just seems that there are an amazing number of photographers who excel in that regard.) I’ll have to ruminate on that a bit, because I typically go out looking for eye candy (which I love, don’t get me wrong) and I think I need to be more open to what’s unique.
Thanks again for doing this. It must take a huge amount of your time. I’ve enjoyed all of these critique sessions that NPN has hosted, but especially enjoyed the competition aspect of this one since that is new to me.
