Please post no more than five images a day and respond to as many images as you post. Critics, please be constructive, specific, and nice! Moderated by gahspidy and mtbbrian.
By posting on the Photo Critique forum you agree to post only your own photos, be respectful, and give back as much as you receive. This is a moderated forum and anything abusive or
off-topic will be removed.
I'm not thrilled with the subject in the second one, but l like the conversion the best, the dark sky is my favorite thing in a black and white. I still haven't been able to perfect the best technique for B&W conversion.
Rule books are paper they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal. --Ernie Gann-- What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. --Oscar Wilde--
I'm not thrilled with the subject in the second one, but l like the conversion the best, the dark sky is my favorite thing in a black and white. I still haven't been able to perfect the best technique for B&W conversion.
The first on was taken about 4 pm, color negative film, with a Nikormat, Mt. St. Helens before (1976-1977), the Second on was taken about 6 am with slide film, and was taken because of the clouds with a Letax, a Lica Clone, Mt Hood, Timberline bunny slop rope tow (1966). Yes the exposure on the first is a little under exposured but it's only photo I have that wasn't taken with a Kodak 620 folding camera, which focus was never that sharp.
GRF
Panorama Madness:
Nikon D800, 50mm F1.4D AF, 16-35mm, 28-200mm & 70-300mm
I have to agree, the subject of the second image doesn't really do a lot for me but it does convert very well and I think that the end result, in B&W works better than the colour image.
St. Helens was a beautiful mountain. I prefer the color version. The b/w could pass as an old photo if it weren't for the jet contrail.
The second did conver better.