Light at the end of the Tunnel

This one had some views in my gallery so I thought I would share it here. Comment are welcome.
Greg
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k3...atthend2as.jpg

I love it... specialy the yellowish tone of the light....

STAY AWAY FROM THE LIGHT!!!!! hehehehe i always wanted to say that!

Great photo...:thumbsup:

Marc

its nice but the techncal side of me cant help but think wrong white balance.. i am perhaps too much the techno geek and not enough the artist..

trog

I like the yellow...anyone read "neverwhere" by Neil Gaiman.. it reminds me of Night's Bridge in the book....in fact, it's creeping me out due to that reference....AHHHHH!!!
I like it!

The "wrong white balance" doesn't bother me here in the least, in fact I think it's right. I am guessing it's a sodium vapor lamp and has an orange-ish color, I wouldn't want this to have "sunlight" colors. I like the reflections on the boards on the road bed, and like the contrast in the structure on both sides. The symmetrical composition is right for this one. Good work.

just as an alternative for curiosities sake..

http://www.cavecom.com/pics/tunnel.jpg

trog

Greg - It's a decent idea but unfortunately it's just too symmetric for me. Also, I don't really like the colors that were produced on the bottom there... the golden glow seems a little out of place there in the tunnel. Oh well...

GB

Marc, I am glad you like it. But being an electrician staying away is not an option.LOL

deliriumsfrogs, I am not much of a reader, but I am glad you like it and thanks for your comments.

EOS, Good call on the light. It's a high pressure sodium. It's normal color is orange. I have worked on a few.LOL

GB1, Symmetry was what I was after here. I was shooting at high f/stops trying to create the effect. Seems like I read that if you count the rays and divide by two that's how many leaves is on your shutter. But I not sure about it 100%.

Trog, Thanks again. But you should be proud. The color is as it looked when I took the picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

This one had some views in my gallery so I thought I would share it here. Comment are welcome.
Greg

---

The colors are a bit strange but I can't say that it really distracts me much. The one thing that I find to be an issue is the quality of the file itself. There seems to be a good deal of artefacts compression. Other than that, I am enjoying the visual impact of the image, the mood is interesting.

Seb

That's awesome, love the symmetry.

I prefer #1, i like the warmth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seb

The colors are a bit strange but I can't say that it really distracts me much. The one thing that I find to be an issue is the quality of the file itself. There seems to be a good deal of artefacts compression. Other than that, I am enjoying the visual impact of the image, the mood is interesting.

Seb

---

I am not sure what you mean by artifacts. If you are refering to the light within the rays, those are part of the flares. They are in the original RAW file. Thanks for your critique and I am glad you like it
Greg

Its uniqueness, simplicity and symetry gives it some impact and the tones in the different wood shades add to the effect.

The only thing I would do is lighten some of the darker shadow areas.

Ronnoco

Greg, I commented on this picture in your gallery. I like it very much. I think the second version is an improvement, and noticing how it gets more effective with less saturation I'm thinking this could be quite nice as a sepia or b&w version. Good work, Greg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gahspidy

Greg, I commented on this picture in your gallery. I like it very much. I think the second version is an improvement, and noticing how it gets more effective with less saturation I'm thinking this could be quite nice as a sepia or b&w version. Good work, Greg

---

Perish the thought. Colour has more impact and according to a 2005 study holds attention 82% longer than black and white.

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Perish the thought. Colour has more impact and according to a 2005 study holds attention 82% longer than black and white.

Ronnoco

---

Well, not for me on this particualiar picture. . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gahspidy

Well, not for me on this particualiar picture. . . .

---

Well, there might be a handful of people with black and white TVs too. :D :D :D

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Well, there might be a handful of people with black and white TVs too. :D :D :D

Ronnoco

---

According to the study then, they probably spend less time in front of the tele . . .

interesting because i often wonder what appeal black and white adds to an image.. part of me says its just an overused and abused trick to turn a mediocre colour image into an "artistically" interesting one..

but the other part of me says that it "works".. i do wonder why thow..

trog

Here is a couple of alternate versions. One desaturated and one black and white. I also applied heavy noise reduction to the light. Ron , I understand your views of black and white. But I like the desaturated look and also black and white too. Gary I don't know how to work the sephia tone, but will look it up in my PS book. Thanks
Greg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k3...hendnrcl-1.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k3...end3bwnr-1.jpg

[/U]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trog100

interesting because i often wonder what appeal black and white adds to an image.. part of me says its just an overused and abused trick to turn a mediocre colour image into an "artistically" interesting one..

but the other part of me says that it "works".. i do wonder why thow..

trog

---

Trog,,,B/W relies on texture,line,shape and tonality which make up the major elements of compostion without being influenced by colour which can taint the viewer's opinion..
Without these elements an image being either mono or colour wouldn't work...I agree with you sometimes converting a colour image into mono for the sake of "art" usually doesn't work but and image shot specifically in mono with all the above elements in balance can produce wonderful results..

I challenge anyone to negatively critque any of Ansel Adam's works just because they are B/W,,,or would his images work in colour??

Jurgen
Australia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gahspidy

According to the study then, they probably spend less time in front of the tele . . .

---

Yes, but also consider how many people are buying into large LCD colour tvs and expecially HDTV.

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

Here is a couple of alternate versions. One desaturated and one black and white. I also applied heavy noise reduction to the light. Ron , I understand your views of black and white. But I like the desaturated look and also black and white too. Gary I don't know how to work the sephia tone, but will look it up in my PS book. Thanks
Greg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k3...hendnrcl-1.jpg

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k3...end3bwnr-1.jpg

---

The black and white has one heck of a lot of dead space and few tones which makes it ineffective.

Stick to colour!

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yogestee

[/U]

Trog,,,B/W relies on texture,line,shape and tonality which make up the major elements of compostion without being influenced by colour which can taint the viewer's opinion..
Without these elements an image being either mono or colour wouldn't work...I agree with you sometimes converting a colour image into mono for the sake of "art" usually doesn't work but and image shot specifically in mono with all the above elements in balance can produce wonderful results..

I challenge anyone to negatively critque any of Ansel Adam's works just because they are B/W,,,or would his images work in colour??

Jurgen
Australia

---

Black and white relies on the considerable range of tones from rich black to bright white with minimal loss of detail from darkest shadow to brightest highlight. Ansel Adam's work depended on excellent technique on top of considerable detailed work dodging and burning in the darkroom to get the absolute technical best out of the film. Most, if not almost all, of today's photographers do not have the attention to detail or the time to come anywhere close to that level of perfection. I have not seen anything even close here in black and white and that is understandable.

It becomes even more complicated if you are shooting digital by the way, because digital does not handle black and white as good as film. The only good black and white that I have seen from digital is through two professional software conversion filters and even then some further tweaking has been required.

Bottom line is that unless a photographer is willing to spend a considerable amount of time learning how to shoot and postprocess solely for black and white , he_she is likely to produce POOR quality results. Poor results that I have most often seen.

To add, black and white is never a solution to a weak or so-so colour photo. If it is weak in colour, it is often even weaker in black and white. To make matters even worse is those who suggest that it should be done in black and white with more contrast. A limited tonal range in black and white is a recommendation to make the photo even weaker and poorer in quality. I freely admit to having no tolerance for these kinds of suggestions to make a photo poorer in quality. I have also seen black and white used to solve a distracting colour problem in the background. That is not a valid solution for improving a shot either.

Scenics particularly, if they have any impact in black and white have MORE impact in colour. People see the world in colour. Black and white is artificial and "fake" to use someone's elses criticism.

Ronnoco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Black and white relies on the considerable range of tones from rich black to bright white with minimal loss of detail from darkest shadow to brightest highlight. Ansel Adam's work depended on excellent technique on top of considerable detailed work dodging and burning in the darkroom to get the absolute technical best out of the film. Most, if not almost all, of today's photographers do not have the attention to detail or the time to come anywhere close to that level of perfection. I have not seen anything even close here in black and white and that is understandable.

It becomes even more complicated if you are shooting digital by the way, because digital does not handle black and white as good as film.

Ronnoco

---

I have to agree with you here Ronnoco,,,digital does not handle B/W particularily well..Here is my theory on why not..

A perfectly exposed perfectly developed B/W negative has a brightness range of around 5 stops from the deepest blacks to the crispest whites with a miriad of grey tones in between...To get the best possible print to duplicate all these tones one must print the negative on a topshelf fibre based paper such as Ilford Gallery,,,resin coated papers are good but will never reproduce all these tones..Probably the best B/W film on the market is Kodak TriX 400..If handled with respect it has an incredably long tonal range,,,Ilford PanF 50 comes a close second..

Even your high DSLR camera will only handle a brightness range of 3 stops at the most before you lose shadow detail and the highlights blow out,,similar to transparency films like Kodak Ektachrome or Fujichrome..What happens when you shoot B/W in digital or convert to Greyscale in Photoshop the midtones get compressed...This phenomenom is also indicative when a B/W film is pushed processed...You lose the mid tonal range where by the tones which are similar in tonality blend together as one tone..Increasing the contrast although giving you darker blacks and whiter whites will only exasterbate your problems,,you lose even more mid tones...hence as you put it a poor image...

To understand the relationship between exposure and development (also digital post processing) one must shoot and develop one's own B/W negatives and print your own prints...To gain the perfect result one must first have the perfectly exposed negative...In digital terms one must first start with a perfectly exposed image....Photoshop although will (or could) make a better image out of a good one but never out of a poor one..

Jurgen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Yes, but also consider how many people are buying into large LCD colour tvs and expecially HDTV.

Ronnoco

---

Yes, and lots of them are watching "The Twilight Zone" or "The Honey Mooners" or "I Love Lucy" (all b&w series) etc. on their big color screens. None of these series would be as effective in color, for me, anyway.
High contrast b&w photos can be very effective. . it depends on the particuliar image.
I have a considerably different opinion and view on this than you, but I respect your right to your point of view.

Greg. . . I like the desaturated version alot, much more so than the original. The b&w can be effective here, but I'm not happy with the results of your particuliar conversion.
Here is a b&w version that retains more of the tones from the original. However, I still am finding your desaturated version the best result of all.
Great image anyway it's sliced.