Help me decide: is B/W or color better for this image (Page 2): Your "fix", that you sent me in a PM, to the color version is very close to the JPG I created by exporting from...

PeterBergh

Linda From Maine wrote:

I suspect you (or someone) can coax a better exposure out of this, even if shot in jpg. I see a lot of details in the lightest areas. What was your interest in that scene? What caused you to stop and shoot this specific composition? The answers will help you decide whether b&w or color tells the stronger story.

Your "fix", that you sent me in a PM, to the color version is very close to the JPG I created by exporting from Lightroom and that came out too light after posting. The image was taken 25+ years ago; I have no clue why I took it, but I suspect I thought that the formations were beautiful.

tommystrat Loc: Bigfork, Montana

Linda From Maine wrote:

I suspect you (or someone) can coax a better exposure out of this, even if shot in jpg. I see a lot of details in the lightest areas. What was your interest in that scene? What caused you to stop and shoot this specific composition? The answers will help you decide whether b&w or color tells the stronger story.

Perfect! Rather than a quick response, your words encouraged a deeper look into the WHY and not just the WHEREFORE! Huzzah, Linda!

PeterBergh

PeterBergh wrote:

... Unfortunately, the images show as overexposed. Please disregard the exposure.

Mea culpa. I was viewing the images om a grossly overbright monitor. When I view them on a reasonable monitor, they show the way I want them.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

PeterBergh wrote:

The overexposure comes from the posting; the JPGs I created by exporting from Lightroom are properly exposed.

You might want to re-scan them. Even the downloaded versions look too bright.

But there may be other issues. Is your monitor calibrated?

PeterBergh

selmslie wrote:

You might want to re-scan them. Even the downloaded versions look too bright.

But there may be other issues. Is your monitor calibrated?

Mea culpa. I was viewing the images om a grossly overbright monitor. When I view them on a reasonable -- calibrated -- monitor, they show the way I want them. In nature, the formations are very bright.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

PeterBergh wrote:

Mea culpa. I was viewing the images om a grossly overbright monitor. When I view them on a reasonable -- calibrated -- monitor, they show the way I want them. In nature, the formations are very bright.

We can't see the exposure and ISO in the EXIF. Can recall what it was?

I realize this was a scan so the digital file would not have that information.

Rolk Loc: South Central PA

Longshadow wrote:

I like the color for this one.

Longshadow, by playing around with the exposure, highlights
and shadows, this is an amazing image. I gravitate to bold colors
but the muted pastels in this rock formation are gorgeous.

I'll pm you what I came up with.
Tim

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

tommystrat wrote:

Perfect! Rather than a quick response, your words encouraged a deeper look into the WHY and not just the WHEREFORE! Huzzah, Linda!

The subject of b&w vs. color (of same image) has always been of interest to me. In this topic the conversation has revolved more around the exposure, but I hope the OP is willing to discuss his own preference of one over the other...and yes, the why

PeterBergh

selmslie wrote:

We can't see the exposure and ISO in the EXIF. Can recall what it was? ...

The image is a scan of a transparency from a Mamiya RB67, a completely manual film camera, so there are no EXIF data. The picture was taken 25+ years ago; I have no clue what the exposure was, nor do I recall what lens I used. I think the film was Velvia 50.

PeterBergh

Linda From Maine wrote:

The subject of b&w vs. color (of same image) has always been of interest for me. In this topic the conversation has revolved more around the exposure, but I hope the OP is willing to discuss his own preference of one over the other...and yes, the why

The reason I posted both versions is that I have difficulties making up my mind which image I like best. The color one is geologically more interesting, but the B/W brings out the shapes better. Had I a strong preference for one or the other, I would not have posted my query.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

PeterBergh wrote:

The reason I posted both versions is that I have difficulties making up my mind which image I like best. The color one is geologically more interesting, but the B/W brings out the shapes better. Had I a strong preference for one or the other, I would not have posted my query.

Thanks! I totally understand about sometimes having difficulty making up your mind.

Regarding your reason for posting this "which do you prefer," keep in mind that this section is hoping to be more than just Photo Gallery without Birds. There is so much we can learn from each other! The Intro for the section here is a great read.

PeterBergh

Linda From Maine wrote:

... that this section is hoping to be more than just Photo Gallery without Birds. ...

Absolutely. I was hoping that, in addition to helping me make up my mind, this topic would stimulate some discussion -- which it has. I must apologize for the exposure side trail; I caused it by initially using a far too bright monitor.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

PeterBergh wrote:

Absolutely. I was hoping that, in addition to helping me make up my mind, this topic would stimulate some discussion -- which it has. I must apologize for the exposure side trail; I caused it by initially using a far too bright monitor.

No worries! You've inspired me to post a similar topic (soon)

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I prefer the b&w and others are already pointing you at the processing possibilities. The pointed rocks at the top I find particularly interesting, looking like caped figures. Think I'd like to see them brought out.

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

Color does it for me!