Candid of a 2 year old "Green Bay" fan C&C welcome

[KimC]

Thank you Binnur :-)

Nice image Kim

[William W]

************************************************** ******************
PREFACE:

In the commentary below the underlined and bold phrase is erroneous.

It remains unedited and as factually incorrect for archival integrity and to keep logical flow and sense to the conversation.

Please see Post #24 for a detailed explanation.

Sorry for any inconvenience that has been caused.
************************************************** ******************

Good shot.
Good conversion.

***

Tit bits –

Not all of the DR is used and considering that he is in open shade, I’d be inclined to help the light a bit and dodge the LH cheek, burn the lips and dodge the teeth. Dodged a bit in the whites of eyes, also.

Rationale: to give more three dimensional depth and emphasis on the “personality” of the mouth’s communication = anticipation / concern / hesitation. Also the slightly wider DR is younger and more vibrant.

***

Big bits –
I’d lose the white line - camera right
Original is on the left:



WW

[KimC]

Thank you Bill. I had not considered dodging and burning specific parts of the boy...very helpful. Question for you -- How did you know not all of the DR was used - based on the histogram? I did a goggle search to try to figure it out myself, but it seemed like it might be more of a calculation, so thought I would ask.

Tit bits –

Not all of the DR is used and considering that he is in open shade, I’d be inclined to help the light a bit and dodge the LH cheek, burn the lips and dodge the teeth. Dodged a bit in the whites of eyes, also.

Rationale: to give more three dimensional depth and emphasis on the “personality” of the mouth’s communication = anticipation / concern / hesitation. Also the slightly wider DR is younger and more vibrant. WW

Ok, thank you.

Big bits –
I’d lose the white line - camera right

Original is on the left:



WW

[William W]

Question for you -- How did you know not all of the DR was used - based on the histogram? I did a goggle search to try to figure it out myself, but it seemed like it might be more of a calculation, so thought I would ask.

I mis-wrote and that was my error for being sloppy.

I am sorry that I caused you to wast time google searching, my error was that I was rushing and didn’t proof read my commentary as accurately as I would normally: this action goes against my 'one shot' philosophy and I am annoyed at myself.

*

Moving on:

At the time I knew exactly what I meant to write, I just didn’t write it correctly: I should have written something like:

“not all of the Shades of Grey are best utilized” or

“the Dynamic Range is not best utilized in the resultant B&W conversion”.

*

My analysis was done by eye. You were kind enough to upload a large file and I up-sized it and was viewing it on my Studio Monitor: but even now on my office laptop, I can see that the Shade of Grey can be better utilized/represented.

(By the way, as it happened, before I wrote my commentary I did look at the histogram, but that was an afterthought. I noted that there was a Black-Black and just short of a White-White, so, for practical purposes: “all of the DR was used”. But in general, if I am using a good monitor I don't look at histograms all that much as a matter of course.)

*

More detail on the message that I wanted to convey:

Note that I mentioned that he was in open shade – what I was getting at, is the light (on him) was soft and we needed to help the light, to give a bit of modelling, to create a bit of depth, to enhance the three-dimensionality of his face, which in turn develops the kid’s personality and vitality and gives more emphasis to his emotions.

So when I wrote “Also the slightly wider DR is younger and more vibrant.” I was specifically meaning “a slightly wider DR on his skin tones, especially of his face” and I was NOT commenting on the overall Dynamic Range of the image.

And you’ll notice that in my edited version of the image, that there are many more TONES OF GREY across the skin tone of his skin, which bring out (physical) dimensions of his cheeks, and general facial structure.

In really simple terms: the light was a tad flat and we needed to help it – it probably appeared OK in the Colour Version because there would be nuances of HUE in the skin tone.

*

Also in my edited version I stretched the Black end of the grey tones a bit – I am reasonably sure that there is still a Black-Black in the edited image, but the Blacks are not as scrunched up as they were in your original

I think you can notice that it is easier to see the kinks in the cap and that there is more detail the ledge which he is holding . . . more detail in the darker areas which are near his face – these enhanced elements also create more of the illusion of three-dimensionality, which in turn allows the viewer more ‘space’ for their eye to interrogate and to ponder and to wander over – hence we look at the photograph as an 'interesting image' for longer time – hence we get more enjoyment from it.

*

Kim, in summary the succinct answer to your question:

I evaluated the B&W image by my eye only, using a good quality studio monitor.

The shot is good. It captures a moment and also describes a personality within that moment.

The B&W conversion is good but I think that it could be improved. The improvements mainly concern enhancing/helping the soft light which is illuminating his face. This could be done during the process of the B&W conversion and that is how I would have done, similar to how and why we used Contrast Filters for B&W Film Photography.

However, I only had a B&W image from which to work, so therefore I had to use Post Production Techniques, (like Dodging and Burning), which I might not necessarily have had to use, if I were working with the original Colour File.

WW

[KimC]

Searching on goggle is never a waste as there is always something to learn.

I am sorry that I caused you to wast time google searching

The below information is extremely helpful and will help me to start the process of training my eye. Thank you!

Also in my edited version I stretched the Black end of the grey tones a bit – I am reasonably sure that there is still a Black-Black in the edited image, but the Blacks are not as scrunched up as they were in your original

I think you can notice that it is easier to see the kinks in the cap and that there is more detail the ledge which he is holding . . . more detail in the darker areas which are near his face – these enhanced elements also create more of the illusion of three-dimensionality, which in turn allows the viewer more ‘space’ for their eye to interrogate and to ponder and to wander over – hence we look at the photograph as an 'interesting image' for longer time – hence we get more enjoyment from it.

Bill thank you for the added clarification as well as outlining what you saw in the histogram. I am still having a hard time with lighting -- determining what's good, what's bad, what's flat, etc. It has gotten a little better, but it's something I really need to work on and train my eye. I have uploaded the colored version just in case you are interested. Based on what my eye sees in the colored version, the pink in his cheeks does add dimension and structure to the face.

Kim, in summary the succinct answer to your question:

I evaluated the B&W image by my eye only, using a good quality studio monitor.

The shot is good. It captures a moment and also describes a personality within that moment.

The B&W conversion is good but I think that it could be improved. The improvements mainly concern enhancing/helping the soft light which is illuminating his face. This could be done during the process of the B&W conversion and that is how I would have done, similar to how and why we used Contrast Filters for B&W Film Photography.

However, I only had a B&W image from which to work, so therefore I had to use Post Production Techniques, (like Dodging and Burning), which I might not necessarily have had to use, if I were working with the original Colour File. WW

[Mike Buckley]

This is an example in which the color version works much better for me. For people who know the hat, they know it's also green. More important for me, the flushed look in the child's face indicating that he is hot shows only in a color version because of the red skin tones.

I am still having a hard time with lighting -- determining what's good, what's bad, what's flat, etc.

Maybe so, but you have gotten so much better at it in a reasonably short period of time.

[bnnrcn]

The color version looks so nice that I wouldn't convert it to B&W Kim

Searching on goggle is never a waste as there is always something to learn.



The below information is extremely helpful and will help me to start the process of training my eye. Thank you!



Bill thank you for the added clarification as well as outlining what you saw in the histogram. I am still having a hard time with lighting -- determining what's good, what's bad, what's flat, etc. It has gotten a little better, but it's something I really need to work on and train my eye. I have uploaded the colored version just in case you are interested. Based on what my eye sees in the colored version, the pink in his cheeks does add dimension and structure to the face.

[KimC]

Thanks Mike for the additional comments. I agree, it was the colored version that I provided to his mom :-)

Thanks for your comment on my lighting frustrations - I appreciate your view on that. Patience is not a virtue of mine.

This is an example in which the color version works much better for me. For people who know the hat, they know it's also green. More important for me, the flushed look in the child's face indicating that he is hot shows only in a color version because of the red skin tones.



Maybe so, but you have gotten so much better at it in a reasonably short period of time.

[KimC]

Thanks Binnur for taking the added time to comment on the colored version. I love his red cheeks, so this was also my preferred version. It was so hot on this day, that my camera stopped working (which reminds me that I need to call Nikon and discuss with them).

The color version looks so nice that I wouldn't convert it to B&W Kim

[Mike Buckley]

It was so hot on this day, that my camera stopped working (which reminds me that I need to call Nikon and discuss with them).

Check the specs listed in the camera manual. The pertinent specs are at the very bottom of the list of specs in my manual.

[KimC]

Thanks for pointing me there - 32-104F. Since I was out in the full sun, it was prob at or close to 104 -- I felt not well the rest of the afternoon. The camera was smarter than me to shut down. It did start behaving after it cooled.

Check the specs listed in the camera manual. The pertinent specs are at the very bottom of the list of specs in my manual.

[jcuknz]

His face and eyes are so compelling I didn't see Donald's highlights until he mentioned them. I do not see the whole picture so a crop from the bottom reduces the board which I guess has significance to an American lost and unwanted by this viewer

[KimC]

Thanks for commenting John. Yes, the board has significance for the American grandmother and father ;-) They built it for the birthday celebration.

His face and eyes are so compelling I didn't see Donald's highlights until he mentioned them. I do not see the whole picture so a crop from the bottom reduces the board which I guess has significance to an American lost and unwanted by this viewer