Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I thought I recognized the name. He had his portfolios printed in Lenswork in #69 (Mar/Apr 07) and #79 (Nov/Dec 08) I think they are also in the Lenswork extended 79 also. Some may prefer to see them printed--Lenswork does a good job with printed monos and they tone (actually they are duotones) them which adds IMO.I have not personally seen them, but a friend has and said they were "impressive" for having come from such a little camera
My vote goes for the Adobe version by a huge margin, it has a lot more atmosphere than the C1 version which looks like something from an average p&s camera to me. Yes, good processing goes a long way, that's just as true in the digital darkroom as it is in the wet one.Rob:
We were on that "walk" together in Puerto Rico and I used this image to teach B&W conversion techniques in LR or ACR without hitting CS. And the technique is very similar to Irakly's
Here is my version from that morning:
EDIT: For giggles, I just re-opened the original M8 RAW and processed it in C1 to compare to my LR result above. Note i processed it to taste instead of trying to duplicate the look. Interesting to me to see how my perception has changed and the difference between the conversions. This file is as it came straight out of C1, even down to the jpeg conversion:
Cheers,
Mud? MUd? MUD? no way! Look at the texture and detail on the tress, the bike cranks, the bike itself, and lets not forget the lovelier and warmer detail, easy to get more contrast without destroying any detail in the LR/PS image too.C1 if my vote counts for anything the mid tones are mud in the LR version