# Monochrome man



## BananaRepublic (Aug 6, 2018)

Some critic would be nice thanks.


----------



## gk fotografie (Aug 6, 2018)

I don't really understand the use of a vignette, sorry, because it has no purpose in this picture.
In the early days this effect pointed on the use of poor quality lenses ...
It seems to me useful to make a better crop, remember what is your subject.
I have made the part of the steering cabin a bit lighter and sharpened that part.
Because the b&w conversion isn't really exciting, I applied a fairly transparent, pale yellow 2nd layer.
Maybe too extreme, perhaps try sepia?
Ofcourse this edit is entirely my idea, maybe you don't like the yellow layer, but I'd definitely make the steering cabin a bit lighter, sharpen this part and try a more interesting crop.

Success, Gerard

View attachment 161547


----------



## sleist (Aug 6, 2018)

That edit is awful.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 6, 2018)

sleist said:


> That edit is awful.



Don't hold back say what you think LOL

I'm not a fan of the tint either, but I also agree with some things brought up by Gerard. Like the vignette not really adding anything. 

I'm viewing on my phone but overall the original seems slightly flat, lacking in sparkle. Though Claas equipment has never had the snazzy bright greens or reds of its competitors it still has a uniqueness that is lacking in the original.


----------



## sleist (Aug 6, 2018)

Why hold back?

Clients that think you suck won't tell you that.  They'll just never come back and never refer.

To critique some vignette - cool.  The edit makes no sense to me given that critique.
I think it's far worse than the original.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 6, 2018)

sleist said:


> That edit is awful.



Except for the part about lightening up and local-area sharpening of the man in the cabin of the combine...the dodging work and the sharpening applied makes him MUCH more of a focal point than he was in the original shot. The lightened-up and sharpened operator makes the photo hugely more impactful, even with the yellow tint applied.

I personally would like to see it in color. But if the OP wants to present it in B&W, then more contrast and a slightly brighter overall look might be helpful; I used to run a combine, and to me, wheat and oats and grass seed or clover harvesting, any of those crops, usually means bright-weather conditions and plenty of light, at least during the majority of the day.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 7, 2018)

Derrel said:


> sleist said:
> 
> 
> > That edit is awful.
> ...



There was plenty of light although the trouble was the colour image was a bit bland, mostly down to me I suppose. Anywho I was just flying a kite with this as I was out of ideas, that's the beauty of critic.

Also attached the colour image. Brightened the driver but its very easy for his hand in particular to go MIA , I did forget to sharpen him though on this version.

Thanks.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 7, 2018)

i would say that the color version is definitely the best so far.  while its not the bright green of a John Deere, or a Case candy apple red, the color palette of the machine itself is interesting enough to warrant being viewed in color. 
im just not feeling that shot as a B&W...maybe theres just not enough contrasting light and dark areas? too much midtone?  I dunno...maybe im just not enough of a B&W fan to appropriately comment on the OP picture. i do like the color shot though.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 7, 2018)

@BananaRepublic I much prefer the color version. From practical experience behind the wheel, there's a lot of dust in the air during operation. One thing you might try in Lr is a judicious use of the Dehaze Slider. Going to the plus side removes haze, darkens, and adds punch to the image.

I've often found myself in the same predicament of trying to make something out of an image that for whatever reason just didn't seem right. So much so that it's made me reevaluate my time behind the camera. Light makes the image, snapping the shutter during midday is always going to mean a lot of work post. That combine will likely be working well into the evening depending on humidity. Think how much better this would have looked in the golden light of a setting sun.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 7, 2018)

gk fotografie said:


> sleist said:
> 
> 
> > That edit is awful.
> ...



I did take on board what you said original and I marked your post as informative as that's what it was. Regarding your edit I tend to stay away from sepia masks as they in my experience turn out entirely different when you go to print. 

As for the "awful" comment that the other guy left; what he didnt think of was the effort you put in to download a re - edit the image and it you should take  little notice of it other than its an opinion. What I dont understand however is why you took it upon yourself to go back through my previous threads and disagree with everyone of them without context that means nothing to me.


----------



## Gary A. (Aug 7, 2018)

I think the shot lacks drama.  There is action coming on here ... a huge combine chewing up spent crops and tossing it out the backside ... a sole man is controlling this crop eating beast.  I believe there are stories here that need to be told with drama and imagination. The sky adds nothing to the Man/Mechanical Beast/Dead Crop story.  Focus on the action, try some optical drama by going wide and getting close, or long and compress the action.  It looks like you use a normal lens from a standing position.  Shoot low, shoot slow, shoot tight ... the photographer can add or subtract drama as they choose.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 7, 2018)

pixmedic said:


> i would say that the color version is definitely the best so far.
> im just not feeling that shot as a B&W





smoke665 said:


> @BananaRepublic I much prefer the color version.



To both members: The colour picture is better and as a machine/gear - head I prefer it but from a more arty view point I was trying to do something else, I am just not practiced at B&W conversions. I would normally look for evening light for such photos but I just happen to come across this guy around 3 o clock one day. I only recently started using LR again and I was expecting to much from this set but its better experiment then delete sometimes.


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 7, 2018)

Gary A. said:


> I think the shot lacks drama.  There is action coming on here ... a huge combine chewing up spent crops and tossing it out the backside ... a sole man is controlling this crop eating beast.  I believe there are stories here that need to be told with drama and imagination. The sky adds nothing to the Man/Mechanical Beast/Dead Crop story.  Focus on the action, try some optical drama by going wide and getting close, or long and compress the action.  It looks like you use a normal lens from a standing position.  Shoot low, shoot slow, shoot tight ... the photographer can add or subtract drama as they choose.



The shooting method outlined is what I normally try to do. The narrative you have added is interesting and I will try to think of it in future.

Thanks


----------



## Derrel (Aug 7, 2018)

I would most definitely try some of the color filter effects in Adobe Lightroom software, since they help to make much better black and white conversions. At times selecting the green or the red or the orange or the yellow filter effect can really make a black and white conversion pop!


----------



## Gary A. (Aug 7, 2018)

I was taught there is little difference between photography and the written word. It is all about communication.  Use lens and angles as adjectives. Fill the frame with the story/subject.  Lighting and timing doesn’t always work in your favor.  Look at the light separate from the subject. See the light.


----------



## unpopular (Aug 13, 2018)

Tell a *story*, convey an *idea*. So tired of the lighting gimmick. Anytime your subject is something other than light and people compliment "the light" the image fails.

"Good Light" can be, and often is, as as much a distraction as "bad light".

The main problem with this image is that it is literal, and, as Gary notes, lacks 'drama'.

You can light it, process it, fiddle in a million different ways, but at the end of the day, it's just a harvester being a harvester. It doesn't say anything about what a harvester intrinsically is, what it means to the individual, to society. It doesn't convey anything intrinsic about it's form, nor really it's function. There is no deconstruction here. It is just what it is.

Light, processing, contrast, color, black and white, all of that is to convey the *idea*. If there's nothing there other than the literal, then there's nothing else you can do to convey anything more than just the literal. This is why people prefer the color version, because it is the most absolute representation of the literal subject. We don't have to seek as deeply to inteprite what it is we're looking at.

This isn't to say it's a bad image, but in the context of being an image that stands as the art object, does not succeed.


----------

