B&W Aiguille du Midi - Grand Jorasses etc

SFTPhotography

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Suspended / Banned
Messages
20,926
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
A while ago @Craigus suggested some B&W's of my visit to Aiguille du Midi. I couldn't make it work the first few tries. B&W doesn't come to me naturally and it's more something I dabble in on a dull grey free afternoon rather than set out to process in. It's taken be the best part of a quarter but quite happy with these but reckon @Neil Burnell would do it better...a lot better.

Grand Jorasses

_DSC2232 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

Mist

_DSC2189 (1) by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

Longer take of Grand Jorasses

_DSC2233 (2) by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

The big wider view from Aiguille du Midi

_DSC2240 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I'm with you that B&W for landscapes doesn't usually float my boat BUT #3 really is very good in my humble opinion. I could look at that for ages.
 
These are very good, Steve. They are good compositions, mountains are very challenging often and I think they work well in B&W.

One thing I have been told about B&W processing that seems to ring true on my images is that we shouldn't be afraid to have some completely black and some completely white elements in the image, I think these could benefit from moving the black and white points slightly further as I've done quickly on #3 below.

I realise though that your style is more of a light touch when it comes to processing, just a thought. Of course I'll remove it if you wish.

View media item 12979
 
Craigus said:
These are very good, Steve. They are good compositions, mountains are very challenging often and I think they work well in B&W.

One thing I have been told about B&W processing that seems to ring true on my images is that we shouldn't be afraid to have some completely black and some completely white elements in the image, I think these could benefit from moving the black and white points slightly further as I've done quickly on #3 below.

I realise though that your style is more of a light touch when it comes to processing, just a thought. Of course I'll remove it if you wish.

View media item 12979
Click to expand...
Craigus said:
These are very good, Steve. They are good compositions, mountains are very challenging often and I think they work well in B&W.

One thing I have been told about B&W processing that seems to ring true on my images is that we shouldn't be afraid to have some completely black and some completely white elements in the image, I think these could benefit from moving the black and white points slightly further as I've done quickly on #3 below.

I realise though that your style is more of a light touch when it comes to processing, just a thought. Of course I'll remove it if you wish.

View media item 12979
Click to expand...

I prefer to have a close to black and close to white point in the image. Look closely it is there but all the detail is too. I cannot wait to get back there next year.
 
I see what you're saying, but retaining detail is not the be all and end all, especially if it is to the detriment of the overall image or if the image could be more compelling. Not that that's necessarily the case here, but seems to be a trap that many Landscapers fall into.

I'm heading that direction next year too, very excited at the prospect of possibly heading back up the aiguille du midi. (y)
 
They are all lovely images that work fine in black and white. The discussion about the strong black and white points is an interesting one, I think on a monitor or an iPhone in this age of instant gratification where we glance at an image for a split second, then yes you need more contrast to grab that attention. In print, under natural lighting with time to look at the images then the strong black and white is utterly dependent on the mood the photographer is trying to convey, and not always necessary.

I think what @Neil Burnell would be doing differently Steve is approaching the scene in his mind as a black and white (or toned black and white). So you are pre visualising the strength of the scene as a monotone and almost imagining the processed image as you are setting up the shot. That way you will ensure it is striking in it's simplicity, or tells a story with the distribution of the tones. I don't do very many black and whites, but I usually know what images I am going to process in black and white whilst I am taking them. Something I liked about the Sony A7 I had was you could set the viewfinder to display the image in black and white at the click of a custom button. In removing colour from the scene it allowed you to see if it work or not. Or, even for a colour image it allowed you to see lines of composition clearer in some ways.

Obviously as a post processing conversion you have your own style of doing things, that as I say would suit print in my opinion. There is software like Nik Silver Efex Pro that will do all the filters and toning for you, but I'm not sure that is your thing...
 
Craig_85 said:
They are all lovely images that work fine in black and white. The discussion about the strong black and white points is an interesting one, I think on a monitor or an iPhone in this age of instant gratification where we glance at an image for a split second, then yes you need more contrast to grab that attention. In print, under natural lighting with time to look at the images then the strong black and white is utterly dependent on the mood the photographer is trying to convey, and not always necessary.
Click to expand...

Image size makes a huge difference to the processing needed. Generally an image presented at 480x320 requires more saturation and contrast than the same image at 1800x1200 to carry impact. If these were all printed up to be 4 feet on the longest side and hung on a wall then I doubt we'd be worrying *too much* about strong blacks and whites, although some do have a preference for those to be stronger than here.

I used to be part of a photo-sharing site called Lightbox, and small versions of uploaded images would be moved down the screen continually. I quickly realised that when shown at a small size, careful tones and fine detail were invisible, and if you wanted people to look at your pictures then they needed to be strong and punchy, even though they were often less good when viewed at full size.
 
Nice work Steve they sit well with your style IMO. I would have gone for more contrast myself especially not lifting the shadows so much but they are not mine.

3 is very nice but I am loving the 2 with those subtle tones and small piece of clarity through the mist.
 
I think these look really good Steve, not sure I'd do any better they would be different for sure, but I might of been out of my comfort zone a little! Anyway I like what you have done with these and they fit your portfolio nicely.
 
Neil Burnell said:
I think these look really good Steve, not sure I'd do any better they would be different for sure, but I might of been out of my comfort zone a little! Anyway I like what you have done with these and they fit your portfolio nicely.
Click to expand...

I’d loved to have seen what you’d have done mind. Yours is one of the few books I own ;)

You should go here, everyone who’s commented on this should go. It’s mesmerising
 
Oh and cheers for purchasing the book, got a 2nd edition running now which are just over half sold out, bit slower than the first edition! Are there forum rules about sharing links to books, if not I should maybe do a thread to try sell a few more!
 
Neil Burnell said:
Oh and cheers for purchasing the book, got a 2nd edition running now which are just over half sold out, bit slower than the first edition! Are there forum rules about sharing links to books, if not I should maybe do a thread to try sell a few more!
Click to expand...

PM me I'll have one! Missed the last batch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top