Broken bottle neck in monochrome

[Mike Buckley]

This is the bottle neck from the broken wine bottle displayed in a different thread.

The tabletop is glossy black acrylic. The glossy silver background not in the scene is bent around the tabletop to generate the desired shadows and highlights reflected in the tabletop. Two medium continuous-light lamps with diffuser socks attached were used -- one on the right side and one on the left side.

EDIT: I was unhappy with the lack of separation between the foil and its reflection in the first photo. So, I reworked the post-processing in the second photo. The primary difference in the post-processing is that I converted to monochrome using a color filter in the first version, whereas I desaturated the second version.

[Marie Hass]

Dear Mike,

I don't think the silver paper works as well as you want it to? To me, the graininess of the paper speaks of too high ISO, but I know that cannot be?

The bottle top might be better if the angle is changed? I would like to see more of the sleekness and reflections in the round "hip" rather than the relatively featureless inside of the bottle. Right now, to me, the image looks flat.

Lighting on the broken edge needs to be more evident. Right now, only certain spots are highlighted.

Since I am just learning, please tell me if I am off base.

'Rie



'Rie

[Mike Buckley]

Good comments, Marie. Most of what you mention comes down to personal preference, so it's important to know what you like and don't like.

The characteristics of the paper provide the reflection that I wanted in the tabletop. I could have used a plain white background to create a smooth reflection, but that's a common way of making this type of photo and I wanted to do something different. I never do anything just to be different; I have to like whatever I do and I like this. Having said all that, I may make another photo using a plain reflection in the tabletop because I'm sure I would like that also.

The ISO is 100, my camera's base ISO. My thinking is that a lot of people viewing digital photos online are way too preoccupied with the appearance of noise. All too often they see what they think is noise that actually isn't noise. Other times they see noise that really is noise as a detriment when it might have been intended as an attribute and indeed can be an attribute (though I've personally never been smart or creative enough to use noise as an attribute).

There are literally infinite ways to position the subject. Naturally, I chose this position because it shows off the characteristics that I most wanted to display at the time. That's not to say that I couldn't use a different position or even a series of positions that I might like just as much.

Similarly, I might have been able to display direct reflection along the entire forward, upper break of the glass. However, my primary intent is that all edges of the glass are defined. That's so when I view the image in the Lytebox (not so at the small size displayed in the thread).

My biggest disappointment is a characteristic that you didn't mention: there is no clear separation between the foil and the reflection of the foil. Given the limitations of my makeshift studio, to retain the characteristics displayed here and to add that separation would have required making a second capture. I didn't try it because I sensed that the result would have been overall less pleasing to me because of an unnatural appearance. Considering that I didn't try it, I might be wrong about that.

[Marie Hass]

Dear Mike,

Maybe the "flatness" that I spoke of was due to the lack of separation? Just don't get a sense of dimensionality that I have seen in your other images.

Hmmmm - i may have to break a bottle so I can play with the properties as well? that way, i would know better what I was looking to tell you about.

'Rie

[Mike Buckley]

I recommend that you not break any glass. Instead, just invite me over for dinner and your desired outcome is likely to happen by accident.

I didn't mention that this glass is so thick and dark that it is almost opaque; it doesn't have the nearly transparent or completely transparent characteristic of glass that I typically photograph.

[Marie Hass]

lols, Mike, it would be you AND your wife and the drive would be about 6 hours. We have a guest room, and Pete is a great host.

But, if you come, you and I will have to retire to the "studio" with our "brandies and cigars" and take some pictures. lols.

Marie

[Mike Buckley]

It has been bugging me why there was so little separation between the foil and its reflection when I didn't remember having such a severe issue when I lit the scene. So, I finally got around to revisiting the scene as it was captured in color. Sure enough, neither the lighting nor my post-processing of the color image prior to making the monochrome image were the problem; my post-processing of the monochrome image was the problem. Shame on me!

I created a second version and I'm much happier with it. I added it along with an explanation of the primary difference in post-processing the two versions to the first post of the thread.

[Marie Hass]

Yes! Well done, Mike.

Funny how images usually need time to mature before we come to solutions that are right for them.

Marie

[Mike Buckley]

That's unusual for me, Marie. It's also very unusual that I revisit the post-processing of an image in a major way such as this one. I'm sure that happens less than 1% of the time.

By the way, I never photographed this bottle neck using a plain bright background instead of the silver paper. Instead, I smashed it with a hammer so the pieces would be small enough to safely fit in an empty bottle that originally contained orange juice. Putting the broken glass in the enclosed bottle and labeling the bottle to indicate that broken glass is enclosed protects the folks at the recycling plant from being cut.

[Marie Hass]

Dear Mike,

I don't know. Now-a-days, I am less hasty in my PP. Sometimes I will wait to PP an image because I have several ideas as to rendition. Or I will process then wait and revisit what I have done.

Thanks to you, I now have a lot of questions as to the reflective qualities of different types of glass. I have also caved and purchased from B&H some equipment for my studio. I got a light stand with a boom, an 33' flash cable (so I can move around easily with my flash) and a hot shoe adaptor.

I think I am in trouble.....

PS. that is a good idea for disposal of broken glass. I always worry when i put broken glass of any kind in the trash bin.

Marie

[John 2]

Mike, it's definitely the second for me. However, what strikes me is that unlike the neck, the underside of the shoulder of the bottle has very little modelling light to give it shape. I am the last to know whether this is a reasonable critique or how to put it right if it is but I mention it as a constructive if uninformed thought.

[Mike Buckley]

Congratulations on your new equipment, Marie. Does your boom have a counter weight? I ask because mine doesn't. I wish it did even though that would have made it more expensive and perhaps larger, an important consideration considering the limited space in my makeshift studio.

I am surprised about your need for a flash cable. Does your camera not control an off-camera flash using an infrared beam of light?

[Mike Buckley]

the underside of the shoulder of the bottle has very little modelling light to give it shape. I am the last to know whether this is a reasonable critique or how to put it right

Every critique is reasonable when the critique, like yours, relates to a characteristic that is unappealing to you. Given enough time, cost and expertise, anything can be changed by using different lighting. For me, the outer edge of the shoulder has so much shape that the shape of the underside is implied. Having said that, your comment that the underside on its own is lacking shape is irrefutable.

[selig1656]

personally pic #2 does it for me. well done.