Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Film Forum' started by califlefty, Jul 9, 2008.
A BW conversion of a Kodachrome slide. Exposure unknown. Camera Nikon F2A.
What powerful contrast, I like it.
Thanks for the share.
I like it too, very much so, it is very pleasing to the eye. The twin curves of light really make the photo IMHO. Living in this smoky, hot, hell, otherwise known as Northern California :biggrin: right now really makes me long for those crystal clear skies of northwest Wyoming. It's actually been 3 or 4 years since I've been there, which is a long time for me.
Feels dark to me. I don't see any pure white.
Thank you for your comment. I chose not to go any brighter on the whites for fear of blowing out the highlights. I chose to retain the dark, pre-dawn mood which I felt was the more salient issue as opposed to meeting what I believe is an artificially imposed "standard" of a having all zones present in a black and white image, while desirable, not necessary IMHO. I did make a very slight layer adjust in the foreground highlights to brighten them up maybe a 1/4 stop to compensate for appearance on the monitor.
You can call Ansel Adams' zone system an artificially imposed standard I guess, but I think it is a pretty darn good system for creating amazing prints.
I'm not here to argue with you, that's my opinion. In a conversation I had with Ansel, it was also his.
No arguments from me, just conversation. From Adams' description, Zone 9 is: "Glaring white surfaces. Snow in flat sunlight. White without texture. (The only subjects higher than Zone 9 would be light sources; they would be rendered as the maximum white value of the paper surface."
It seems to me you could raise your clouds, or the highlights on the water to zone 9 without losing detail. It is a personal choice, of course, but I would really love to see more details in your shadows.