For Ken....
D2xs 600mm 1/500 f8 iso 1000
rain in the Kalahari a rare but beautiful sight.....
For Ken....
D2xs 600mm 1/500 f8 iso 1000
rain in the Kalahari a rare but beautiful sight.....
Hi Peter, perhaps you can expand on the treatment you have done/applied to the image from the actual RAW file and what you are/were trying to achieve. I know a lot of people would find it useful, if you wouldn't mind.
Thanks
Steve :)
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Hi Steve
I dont have any problem sharing my workflow whether people find it useful or not... is another thing, the first point I want to make is probably the most important, is the "choice of image" to convert ,it may sound obvious but its amazing the reason why people choose to convert an image to B&w, it ranges from light was too harsh , it didnt work in colour so it will work in B&w...etc
For me the majority of the time I choose to make a B&w image is done before I press the shutter button. In other words its intentional , I look for tonal range, contrast, texture, patterns, HL/S and a strong composition in an image. This make the conversion process a simple process....
My workflow is rather simple , It takes me no longer than 15 mins or so... My PP skills are still very basic compared to many gurus on this site, I am always trying to improve as I believe that it is very important to be as every bit as good at PP work as it is a capturing an image....
Raw conversion in LR 3, For me the most important tool in PP is the crop tool... so I always do this first...then I do basic adjustments in exposure etc, to get the best tonal range in my histogram , then adjust the tone curve , I do minimal amount of sharpening and NR then export to Silver efex,
For this image the most important thing was to accentuate the rain, so this was done using the 3 basic sliders , brightness lowered, increase in contrast and increase in structure... no filters , no control points, no preset used, then exported to PS CS5, LCE 10-20-0, then HL/S tool ... resized then small amount of sharpening and NR...
Sorry it s not very exciting or enlightening. A very simple conversion.. as I said before and I cannot emphasis enough a successful B&w is created most of the time in the viewfinder ....
Peter ,
Hi Peter, many thanks for this, personally I always find it interesting to know the thinking behind the image when it is like this.
As it is getting late now, if you don't mind, I will read again, with interest the information and reply tomorrow, however I am sure those who are behind in time sense will find this both interesting and hopefully beneficial.
Once again many thanks for taking the time to expand.
Cheers
Steve![]()
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Big Thanks for the explanation Peter
Main thing to note here is the selecton for conversion .... actually done ahead of taking the image !!!! It is key, most conversion that I see are done to see how it looks ...... etc !! Tough making good nature B&W images ... this is a good one !!!
... btw about all I would change is the animal placement to keep out of center !!! Big Congrats on this one !!!
Thanks Peter for your additional workflow information. I find it very useful to understand a variety of thinking behind the b&w process as it is a key to the success or otherwise of the image. I like your approach and often the simpler the pp required, the more successful the final image.
I like this photo very much, but would have liked the wildebeest positioned slightly more to the left as noted by Al, however it is very effective as presented.
Ken has done well with a dedicated wildebeest (or gnu as he prefers) and some bears!
Peter,
Thanks two dedications in a day, I wish I could return the compliment.
IMHO this works really well, you have a great knack for making the animal that most people ignore into a very interesting subject.
Where in the Kalahari was this taken?
Is it raining everywhere now:D
WOW , this is absolute gorgeous image , thanks for work flow too TFS
Hi Peter
Personally I think you are one of the few who thinks in that manner and I commend you for that, as most of us think in the way you have illustrated, although certain animals do lend themselves more to B/W.
Having PS is important, but should IMHO never over step the world of photography, it is there as a tool,not a crutch! having a good image firstly is paramount, how you treat it thereafter is down to you, I tend to think of it as 'polishing the image off' when it goes to PS, or just refining it. If an image is soft or badly composed then PS will not help here.
I wonder Peter, would you have been able to move more to the right and have, so the head was closed to camera rather than the rear? My eyes just keep getting drawn there:confused:, or even side on? The rain looks impressive, almost 'snow like', certainly looks impressive. Would agree, a little less on the lhs would help. Overall for me, it has more of a quality of illustrative rather than photography, however thats just my thoughts. I do like it and think the way it has been executed from concept to end product has worked extremely well. Is it worth posting in OOTB to perhaps for additional feedback Peter?
Many thanks once again for both posting and expanding on the thinking/workflow behind the image.
Steve![]()
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
you certainly know how to pick them beforehand Peter...nice job here too...
I agree with Al on the placement of the animal, but love the rain and the way you accentuated it in your conversion. Thanks a lot for sharing the workflow too...
:p