Pre Highway

For my series (possibly) on Highways and the impact on enviroment.
May have to rename the title and just go with "Roadways" for the series concept.

Anyway, appreciate some feedback.
Cheers.

good luck! its pretty angering when people destroy beautiful land to overpopulate. I really like the composition, a very interesting angle in every regard, from the small dirt path to the two mountains to the tractor and rocks everything is very well composed. However, i'm not a huge fan of black and white, and with the colors that would be here i think they would work very well - also seems a bit tonally flat. the two mountains particularly, they blend together a bit too much i'd like to see them feel seperate in the shot and create some depth. where is this anyway, montana? something tells me its montana ;)

PlantedTao
You have the beginings of a great photo here , but it seems to be missing the wow factor . You need something to really pull me into this one instead of letting me look at it from afar, maybe more definition on the heavy equipent. Just a tought :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knight

PlantedTao
You have the beginings of a great photo here , but it seems to be missing the wow factor . You need something to really pull me into this one instead of letting me look at it from afar, maybe more definition on the heavy equipent. Just a tought :)

---

i dunno if id say that - i think its a great shot and with some added depth it would definitely make the cut!

*edit - from a technical standpoint i think i would adjust for highlights, darken the highlights a bit, bring out more detail in them.

I agree with Knight. From the point of view of composition, Planted Tao, and you have used that term, yourself, a path is supposed to lead into the photo toward the centre of interest. There is however no centre of interest at the end of the path. The tractor is a too minor part of the photo. Perhaps a different angle or moving closer to the tractor and using a wide angle lens for depth of field would have given you a more dramatic photo.

Ronnoco

" i think its a great shot and with some added depth it would definitely make the cut i think "
Anbesol exacly more depth would do it , the photo appears to be flat . It would be nice to C a bit more definition and contrast in the distance, but i still think the heavy equipement needs a little also :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knight

" i think its a great shot and with some added depth it would definitely make the cut i think "
Anbesol exacly more depth would do it , the photo appears to be flat . It would be nice to C a bit more definition and contrast in the distance, but i still think the heavy equipement needs a little also :)

---

So, why is it a great shot, Knight? What is the centre of interest?

Ronnoco

if the focus and goal of the picture was the heavy equipment then yes, the equipment isnt as prominent of a subject - however, as he stated - the subject, or objective if you will, of the shot is highways and the impact they have on the environment. I think this shot does a good job expressing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anbesol

if the focus and goal of the picture was the heavy equipment then yes, the equipment isnt as prominent of a subject - however, as he stated - the subject, or objective if you will, of the shot is highways and the impact they have on the environment. I think this shot does a good job expressing that.

---

Ambesol, if it is as you say highways and their effect on the environment then the very first major point is that it should be in colour. Second major point is that I do not see any impact. I have seen huge rock faces cut in two with a new highway going through the middle. That would make a much more dramatic shot with much more impact.

Ronnoco

Ronnoco,
Agreed, making the tractor more dominant may have provided a more dramatic photo. The "path" does not have to lead to a major point of interest always, seems kinda fitting that this paths lead to nothing...
Once again great points, followed by inane comments to try to flex your mental prowess...it all falls flat much like the tones of this photo. :rolleyes:

Knight & Anbesol -
Thank you so much for your input. I think your are both right and the wow factor could come from better tones. This photo falls a bit flat as was stated...but I'm extremely pleased with my composition and general "feel" of the photo.
I believe B&W portraits the message better than color, IMHO.

Question:
Anyone with darkroom and RC variable contrast (or any paper) knowledge know how to get more umph into this photo? There will be no retakes on this one, unfortunately.

Cheers.

what grade of filter were you using for the paper? It looks lik eit needs more grade and a little more time under the enlarger. It looks lik eit was about a 3 grade filter, but its hard to tell without lookiing at the neg.

Z -
Your good :D
Actually a 3.5 filter at 26 seconds. The sky was burned in for another 30 seconds...so that should give you a good idea of the negative quality. :o It was really bright conditions and I over developed the roll a bit...:(

So, I guess your saying take it up to maybe a 4.5 filter and more time?

Man, this is one of the photos I WANT to work, so I appreciate the help.

Cheers.

Tao try a 4 filter for an even 30, then burn in for another 30. This should give you a definite black somewhere in there probably on the endloader. This should also help bring out the background more. You might have to burn this in sections starting with the sky and then the mountains. I have done a similar print like this before and it does take lots of practice but can be rewarding. Just remember when you up the contrast you have to up the time by about 5-10%. Are you using Ilford or Kodak filters?

Z-
I'm using Ilford filters on a enlarger that I rent at a photographic center. The filter are in decent (some are poor) shape, but if you thought it was worth it I would buy my own...
I also us Ilford VC RC paper with a pearl finish.
Thanks for the tip on increasing time when you up the contrast...that will save me some time and money in the darkroom :)
Thanks for the help.

Cheers

Planted- Great image and great idea for your series. I think that the sky is where this image lacks. It just seems a bit to blah and flat. Bump the contrast and burn it a bit to bring out the seperation of the light and dark elements of the clouds. IMHO.

Tao-

As long as the filters still retain their color and you can't see white light through then you should be in good shape, but if you do see white light then it is time to get your own. You can get a set of ilford filters for less than $15 at most camera stores or online at B&H or Porters.

As long as you don't get our filters too wet for too long then they will last you for years to come, so its not really an expense but more an investment.

Let us know how the improved image comes out.

Zack

You could also open the lens up one more stop and then you wouldn't have to expose the paper for as long. Or, put in cold water when mixing the developer. That will increase the contrast as well. Oh, and glossy paper usually has a bit more contrast to it as compared to pearl. Eh, just wanted to add my two cents. Speaking of cents, if you're looking to save some on paper, you can get some awesome deals at freestylephoto.biz. They have an arista.edu paper that's only around $26 for 100 sheets of 8x10. I use it a lot and have gotten some really nice results. Ok...I think I've rambled enough...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PlantedTao

Ronnoco,
Agreed, making the tractor more dominant may have provided a more dramatic photo. The "path" does not have to lead to a major point of interest always, seems kinda fitting that this paths lead to nothing...
Once again great points, followed by inane comments to try to flex your mental prowess...it all falls flat much like the tones of this photo. :rolleyes:

Cheers.

---

Ah, Planted Tao, you were the one that admitted that your photo needed more drama and impact. I merely pointed out your particular choice of shot could have been better.
If you want to react with a silly characterization, it reflects on you.

Cheers!
Ronnoco

Zack - Thanks for all tips. I think I'll drop $15 to get some filters and then I have one less thing to blame :)

Liz - Thanks for adding your 2 cents...but by doing so I will end up spending a LOT of money getting paper and film. Freestylephoto is a great site with some sweet deals. As you are well aware, the darkroom can be expensive. Getting quality paper for cheap will be a big help, thanks for the suggestion.

Jonas - I hope to darken the sky and get more contrast throughout. Thanks for commenting.

Cheers.

No prob Tao...I just like knowing that there is someone else that does actual darkroom work. Keep up the good work, and I will help anyway I can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronnoco

Second major point is that I do not see any impact.Ronnoco

---

he did say series, thats whats great about doing a series of shots, they can express themselves in several shots... :P besides, if all the shots in teh series were that in-your-face with impact, it would get tedious, you want to bring the viewer into the feeling.

Tao, I keep coming back to this and I wonder if there's another element that would really make the point of what you're trying for in the shot. IE: road graders, dump trucks, etc.? Also would it make a difference if you cropped a little to bring the road a little closer to the left edge of the frame, thereby making the heavy equipment and rockpile a more compelling piece? As it stands now, aside from being a little flat in tonality (which has already been mentioned), I keep thinking something's missing. This is your series, so only you know where you're going with this shot. JMHO.
John

Tao,

I don't get the sense of highway or road building from this shot. Perhaps if the surveyors had marked out the roadway or more road building equipement or even they had broken the ground would make this better.

The picture is a little grey, perhaps a deep red filter to make them clouds pop would make this a better B&W. However that depends if this was film or digital (colour conversion)

Roger