Speaking Of Badlands

[Joe Behar]

John,

This one's for you, but  C&C are welcome from everyone

I've photographed the Cheltenham Badlands on and off for a while now, but I keep coming back to this shot.

[John R]

You made your BW look a lot better than mine. Not my forte. Perhaps it is the quality of light and time of day. My attempts resulted in grayish, muddy looking images and lost detail.

Now on to your image. I like the overall look of the image. The angle of light helps bring out the character of the hills and shows some detail and texture. You also managed to make the differentiation in the colour of the clay hills come out with the mottled grays and whites strewn throughout the hills. I guess that is the bands of lime and other minerals. The rock boulders are well placed in the frame and furrow, and look to me, and always have, like earth giving birth to something new. I like the placement of the furrow because it leads the eye through the image, resting at the boulders, and other furrows and shadow lines and then up to the three tree areas surrounded by dramatic clouds. A nice C-curve sweep.

I have two reservations: One- and it it may just be me and my familiarization with the location- but I can't help seeing this place in anything but the rich red clay colours (so not really a criticism). Two- I find the upper dark area of sky (blue in original colour) a bit distracting, taking away from the sweep. So, I would remove that portion of sky. But that could be my taste, because in the colour version, the dark areas of sky may very well balance nicely, with the dark shadow areas of the rest of the scene.

BTW, what camera you using?

JMR

[Joe Behar]

You made your BW look a lot better than mine. Not my forte. Perhaps it is the quality of light and time of day. My attempts resulted in grayish, muddy looking images and lost detail.

Now on to your image. I like the overall look of the image. The angle of light helps bring out the character of the hills and shows some detail and texture. You also managed to make the differentiation in the colour of the clay hills come out with the mottled grays and whites strewn throughout the hills. I guess that is the bands of lime and other minerals. The rock boulders are well placed in the frame and furrow, and look to me, and always have, like earth giving birth to something new. I like the placement of the furrow because it leads the eye through the image, resting at the boulders, and other furrows and shadow lines and then up to the three tree areas surrounded by dramatic clouds. A nice C-curve sweep.

I have two reservations: One- and it it may just be me and my familiarization with the location- but I can't help seeing this place in anything but the rich red clay colours (so not really a criticism). Two- I find the upper dark area of sky (blue in original colour) a bit distracting, taking away from the sweep. So, I would remove that portion of sky. But that could be my taste, because in the colour version, the dark areas of sky may very well balance nicely, with the dark shadow areas of the rest of the scene.

BTW, what camera you using?

JMR

Thanks for the comments John,

Here's the colour version for comparison

I've tried a lot of different methods for B&W conversions and finally settled on Silver Efex by Nik software. I start with one of their presets and tweak from there. After I get as close as I can with that I'll bring the image back into Photoshop and tweak some more.

Right now I'm using a Nikon D300 as my personal camera.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I agree with almost every point John made. But not having been there in person, I prefer the B&W version. I would be tempted to crop down just to omit the dark part of the sky.

Excellent image, great composition and tonalities.

Eric

[Rob C]

Joe, I wouldn't change a thing. I think the b/w version is very strong and the sky, I think, adds to the general weight and power of the scene. On the colour alternative I find I have nothing to say; it's the conversion that makes it for me. You have to judge a picture on its own terms, not on the reality of the scene, which is usually an unknown factor to the viewer. In fact, that's one reason I consider b/w a superior part of the art: you need to develop your sense of dynamics. With colour there are so many pretty pictures which are there already without any photographer input required, thank you very much! But we have touched on this dangerous ground before and never really got anywhere near to a sensible conclusion or resolution of the idea.

Rob C

[RSL]

Joe, I'll second what Rob said. The B&W is strong. The color version is, well, okay, but nothing more.

I love Silver Efex too. I've never found anything else that can do the conversion as well.

[John R]

Joe, I wouldn't change a thing. I think the b/w version is very strong and the sky, I think, adds to the general weight and power of the scene. On the colour alternative I find I have nothing to say; it's the conversion that makes it for me. You have to judge a picture on its own terms, not on the reality of the scene, which is usually an unknown factor to the viewer. In fact, that's one reason I consider b/w a superior part of the art: you need to develop your sense of dynamics. With colour there are so many pretty pictures which are there already without any photographer input required, thank you very much! But we have touched on this dangerous ground before and never really got anywhere near to a sensible conclusion or resolution of the idea.

Rob C

I would say that art is in the artist’s eyes and not in colour or BW. To me BW is another way of seeing and one has to learn it; it is not natural. All the great BW artists knew how to see in tones and which filters to use to bring out or retain tones and contrasts. But BW techniques are limited so one has to start with good images. In our digital age, most of the BW images I see are somewhat removed from reality and the tones are highly manipulated or exaggerated to make the image more interesting and usually more contrasty than it really is. Is this better or more artistic? It’s just another medium. You certainly can’t get away with a lot of manipulation in nature based images without declaring it, especially animals.

I agree the BW image has more impact, largely because Joe has managed to increase and accentuate the tones in greater contrast. But I just can't help seeing the Badlands in other than colour. Ah... maybe some day I will...

JMR

[RSL]

But John, What you're seeing isn't the badlands, it's a photograph that happens to be a photograph of the badlands. The photograph has to stand on its own feet as a photograph, not as a proxy for the badlands. In this case it does exactly that.

[John R]

But John, What you're seeing isn't the badlands, it's a photograph that happens to be a photograph of the badlands. The photograph has to stand on its own feet as a photograph, not as a proxy for the badlands. In this case it does exactly that.

Yes, I got the point, it's my lament of this particular place, nothing else. I appreciate both BW and colour images.

JMR

[Joe Behar]

Yes, I got the point, it's my lament of this particular place, nothing else. I appreciate both BW and colour images.

JMR

John,

For me its the difference between seeing and envisioning.

What I saw was the colour version of the badlands. What I envisioned was the B&W version.

I guess that's what Russ was trying to say (I hope)