Below is a mono conversion.
Is it better in colour (with it's technical flaws), or mono? (I know the mono conversion is a little muddy, but what potential could it have?).
Comments/Suggestions?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A forum for discussions and views on photography, the creative photographic process, digital image making techniques, software and equipment.
5 comments:
A 'very Ivan' shot which I do like. For my money, the B&W is more pleasing as I love the texture of the sand.
A
Yes, I actually prefer the B&W and I think I have commented previously on the soft texture of the sand. That comes out very well in the B&W version.
D
Me too, I prefer the mono. I think the mono hides some of the imperfections in the image (another high ISO shot), as it removes the colour noise and focuses on the textures, as you note.
I was not going to use the colour in any of the photo competitions this year, but I may now do some more careful work on the mono and use that.
Thanks for the comments.
Ivan
Another vote for the mono, though I do like the sky in the colour version.
Can I argue in favour of the colour version, please? The mono conversion makes some subtle, gentle light into a far more harsh image. It clunks between bright grey of the sand to the dark smudge of the grasses. in the colour version the tones of both the sand and the grass is pastel and very attractive - likewise the pale golden cloud on the left hand side just above the horizon which disappears in the mono conversion. I prefer the former.
Post a Comment