blacklady
- Thread starter jeanie
- Start date
- Status
I am in general not drawn to pictures that are heavily grained .... with lots of dark blank spots ... and nearly no details.
That said, did not say the picture is bad, just doesn't work for me.
The one thing I am irritated with, is the noise. Grain and noise are 2 different thing. One is bad and the other maybe good for the right situation, eventhough I don't really like it.
eerrr ...hhmmm ...arrrrr....
no lah
ok, at least i know where i differ from your taste.
i like grain.i like dark.
i like the pose, the girl seemingly lost in her thoughts. i think the is potential in the photo.
i dont like the noise, its too much and not like film grain at all. It should be finer.
I dont like that large parts of photo are an undistinguished black soup... you got to do something about it. I dont know if your original is better, but in this version there is really nothing but black, i tried to recover something but there is nothing to recover....
Slight toning might work to get a black similar to traditional Brom paper...
How did you do the BW conversion? Desaturation or with colour channels....
see, we can see other things than cleavage....
i dont like the noise, its too much and not like film grain at all. It should be finer.
I dont like that large parts of photo are an undistinguished black soup... you got to do something about it. I dont know if your original is better, but in this version there is really nothing but black, i tried to recover something but there is nothing to recover....
Slight toning might work to get a black similar to traditional Brom paper...
How did you do the BW conversion? Desaturation or with colour channels....
see, we can see other things than cleavage....
i like the pose, the girl seemingly lost in her thoughts. i think the is potential in the photo.
i dont like the noise, its too much and not like film grain at all. It should be finer.
I dont like that large parts of photo are an undistinguished black soup... you got to do something about it. I dont know if your original is better, but in this version there is really nothing but black, i tried to recover something but there is nothing to recover....
Slight toning might work to get a black similar to traditional Brom paper...
How did you do the BW conversion? Desaturation or with colour channels....
see, we can see other things than cleavage....
michael,
you are my cs2 sensei.so teach and guide me.
that's why i missed film sometimes.as long as i shoot iso 3200, i will get the effect i wanted.
slight toning blah blah blah that sentence i catch no bola.what's brom paper?eh harlow guys, please dont compare my jargon knowledge with you all lah.i only know how to press shutter button.:dunno:
b&w conversion using channel mixer following ken rockwell's website.
also tried adding grain then desat according to erizai.
if i shoot B&W straight from my d200, will it be better?
time to go kinokuniya and grab more books on b&w toning.:cry:
Brom paper is bromide paper for darkroom work. Normally it is used to give a warm look, but however this paper is pretty expensive nowadays, namely a niche paper. It tends to be at its best with photographs of full tonal scale (namely, full range of tones, no high contrast)
I have a pack of 16x20 right now which I have yet to use...
I would shoot at max colour depth (RAW) with the d200, and create several layers, and with masks slowly render 1 effect per layer and combine them all togather for the final image.
i wont shoot RAW till adobe lightroom is officially launched.
it's just TOO Much time taken to process raw.
imagine, 2 models for me to shoot, and i took more than 2000 pics jpeg large.
if i were to shoot raw, 2 hours pack up go home liao.not enough mem card.
and by the time you see my pp pic, it will be 1 years time.:bsmilie:
elaborate the underlined sentence please.really wanna know the correct workflow.
maybe you wanna try shooting less and do some quality photos instead of 'trying out your luck with 2000 photos?'
i think it's too grainy for my liking. b/w are generally hard to process. too much noise, it looks funny, too little noise, it looks too smooth. i think i would prefer a photo with less noise. you're at like 15% noise now or something right?
i cant shoot less.i'm a trigger happy person.
the shoot, lasted from 630am in the morning to 7pm at night.that's more than 12 hours of continuous firing.i did sort of tell myself to save the bullets but somehow it just came out to 2000+ shots.
and these pics are not chosen out of luck.
cant remember the % for noise.
thanks for your comments.will take note.
memoryblake
New Member
my personal view is that the grains are abit too distracting. first thing that came to my mind was that it was too grainy. Second thought is that i want to see more of the subject's face.
trash can material? i believe it is pretty much up to what you wanted to achieve when u took the photo. to me it was more of a post processing issue.
trash can material? i believe it is pretty much up to what you wanted to achieve when u took the photo. to me it was more of a post processing issue.
I don't like grains for grains sake. I can't stand noise. I hate noise.
There are rare occasions that I like a grainy picture, noisy picture ... transh can.
This one, too bad you shot in jpeg. Not sure if processed differently, what will be the effects.
so is this trash can material?
be honest please guys.:embrass:
Hey Jeanie, don't lose heart. Though it does look more like a ghost sighting, I like the concept.
GHOST ah?:cry:
Ok, how about a deeply melancholic ghost? The model's pose did convey the emotion, just that the lighting and the grain were not cooperating.
that bad ah?:cry:
can show me a pic of a GOOD b&W for comparison so i can learn from here on?
- Status
Similar threads
