B&W for comment

[Kevgermany]

This is one of my favouite images. Was shot on Tri X a while ago in Alderly Edge, Cheshire .

This is my best version

www.kevsgallery.com/photoi/Enticing_Wood_2.jpg

the original scan (downsized) can be found at

www.kevsgallery.com/photoi/Enticing_Wood_for_photoi.jpg

if anyone's interested in having a go. I'm not overhappy with the 'best' version, there's something lacking.

[samdring]

Let blacks be blacks:

[grantp]

Kev,

What do you see as the desirable result for the image?

As an original it looks sort of pale and misty. Is that the intent you pursue?


Grant

[gcrogers]

I almost have to second Grant's question. I used to work extensively, if not exclusively with Tri-X too many years ago than I'd care to admit, and the original looks a bit odd for what I'd consider a normal Tri-X exposure.

Grant mentioned pale and misty. I'd add that I almost see what I'd consider an infra-red effect, which I can't figure out from a Tri-X original. Might go back to the scan somehow.

I'm only talking about the original here, as is Grant I believe. The 'best' looks very good but I'd almost agree something may be lacking, no idea what it might be yet.

[grantp]

Variations created experimenting with Lightzone.

[gcrogers]

Major "Oops" on my part!

I confused the original with your edited version. Disregard previous comments please! I like your final though I still agree something is missing. Haven't quite figured out what it is.

Score another "Duh" for me.
-Greg

[Kevgermany]

Thanks, interesting to see how you'd do things.

I didn't comment before - didin't want to steer/pre-determine things, just wanted to see what people thought it could be.

Intent was to capture what I saw.... Which is in some ways irrelevant. This was the dark, but detailed shapes of the trees, while not losing the light on the background trees/clearing. It was a bright sunny day, the woods were dark, but there were these lovely light patches.

The 'strange' trix may be a resut of the flat scan.

Interesting that you se the foreground trees so dark, I was trying to keep them lighter, with details,

[Kevgermany]

Here are some from Greg:

www.kevsgallery.com/photoi/Enticing_Wood_(greg_v1).jpg
www.kevsgallery.com/photoi/Enticing_Wood_(greg_v2).jpg
www.kevsgallery.com/photoi/Enticing_Wood_2(greg_v3).jpg

[Kevgermany]

The trouble with this is the centre tree, the right curved branch and the contrast range - how to get the highlights down without reducing the problems to silhouettes, but I do like the extracontrast Sam's been able to add, perhaps a little more than I'd want, but it's opening my eyes to possibilites.

Originally thought the toning was wrong, then reverted back to the untoned versions and they looked wrong. Hmmm. Need to think this one through more.

[gcrogers]

Quick comment,
amazing to me how oversharpened my versions (courteuously posted by Kev) look to me. The ones at my end don't look so over-sharp!

Live and learn.
-Greg

[grantp]

Kev,

I'm with you on keeping the detail on the foreground trees and picking up detail a little in the brighter background.

Interestingly the variations I posted look less varied across the selection on my Sony/Firefox/Web connection screen than they do in the original Dell screen in Lightzone. Now while it is not entirely unexpected that things will look different the degree of difference is a bit of a surprise. I assume it relates to the light sources and the difference in resolution.

I'll play around a bit more. So far only overall zone adjustments have been used so there are more tools available.

Grant

[grantp]

It's getting difficult to know where to settle on this one. I have another version of this with the bright grass and foliage at the rear brought down a stop or two. I think that looks better on my editing screen but may be rather flat otherwise.

The tree second from the left and the thinnish branch halfway up the right hand side are as the darkest trees would appear without individual zone adjustments.

Personally I would go for a touch more detail from the bright foliage at the back - it looks better that way to me but then the brightened trees start to look a bit false unless I spend more time playing than I have available at the moment. I left a fair amount of delineating shadow under the thick horizontal bough at the top right. I don't necessarily think that is the way to go.

There are a number of ways to change the effects, all subtly (or not so subtly!) different.

[grantp]

http://www.scene-from-above.com/documents/sfa/Jul2007/kevgermany%20wood-6_lr.tif



Another version saved as a TIFF file this time. Over 8Mb so access with care!

Grant

[Kevgermany]

Have been going back and forth with this myself. Initially I thought Samdring's vesion too dark, but on a calibrated moitor it's got a lot of good ideas... I keep coming back to it and wondering.

Grant, you've explored many themes, thanks, now I need to work out what to do. I'm thinking about your thinking.

Greg Ditto...

[bez]

Kev
One thing that struck me almost immediately is the light patch on the grass, coming straight to camera from the base of the central tree. I know it’s pure coincidence but it almost looks like a bit of bad dodging, as if you had held the tree trunk back with a pencil in the darkroom. I would burn that in slightly to match the grass on either side.
Edit: Strangely the tree to the left has the same effect, but not so pronounced.

Otherwise the slightly darker ones (but not too dark) still retaining detail in the trunks look good



Something like this? I also removed several of the very light leaves in the foreground, which can sometimes be distracting