Saltare Mill.

[John 2]

I think I must be going through my architecture period. I recently posted some shots taken in what is now the exhibition space in this mill (here). I really had wanted to explore the buildings themselves but when you are with friends and family, sometimes you don't have the freedom. I had the opportunity to go back recently and wander around. I've used a fairly hard mono treatment. I thought it suited the industrial nature of the architecture

All Fuji X plus 10mm WA

1. This is the Leeds to Liverpool canal that runs through the mill complex. It doesn't take too much imagination to realise what a hive of activity it once was when cotton was king. It's just used for leisure now.


2. Two views across the weir built to create the pond that fed the mill when it was still in production.

[mugge]

Great pictures and well presented. I especially like #1
Cheers Ole

[Rebel]

Lovely compositions John!

I'm not sure about the P&P though, I found it a bit hard to differentiate between the different elements of the photo.

[Mike Buckley]

I like that the post-processing style is similar with all three images and that all three images include the same building. All of that makes for a pleasing presentation.

[Shadowman]

I'm glad you posted these as they've given me examples of water in monochrome. I was working on a conversion and my water was verging on the black side, granted in the color version the water did look darker than my sky.

Nice lines and I like that reflection in the last image.

[Manfred M]

Once again, these images come to the same high standard we have come to expect of your work.

I think the composition and framing is excellent, but I'm a bit with Matt on this one, the PP work results in fairly busy images and I'm still trying to figure out if I like the shots or not. The first one works well, but I'm not quite as sure about the second and third ones as they seem a touch busy and I suspect this has more to do with the PP work than the original image.

I'd be interested into how you did these conversions and why you chose that particular path. I agree, the look you have used as well as the old mill complex do tie things together.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi John,

I'm with Matt,

I found it a bit hard to differentiate between the different elements of the photo.

I struggled to identify the foreground in #2 (and part of #3) as water at all, initially I thought it was grass terracing.

I wonder if a different colour conversion is possible to say, lighten the trees, or water, to separate them?

Good compositions though.

HTH, Dave

[John 2]

............I'd be interested into how you did these conversions and why you chose that particular path. I agree, the look you have used as well as the old mill complex do tie things together.

Fanciful thinking I suppose Manfred. This area was an industrial heartland around the turn of the century at a time when it's depiction would have been mainly limited to line etchings. It's now tourist country but at that time, the architecture would have suffered a fair amount of grime. It was that sort of feel at I had in mind plus trying to introduce a bit of bite into the image. Maybe I have taken it too far.

I'm with Matt,

I found it a bit hard to differentiate between the different elements of the photo. I struggled to identify the foreground in #2 (and part of #3) as water at all, initially I thought it was grass terracing.

I wonder if a different colour conversion is possible to say, lighten the trees, or water, to separate them?

I can see what you mean Dave. The original conversion (below minus some PP) is OK so far as it goes but I was trying (perhaps failing) to make it more interesting.

[bnnrcn]

Those images work for me John as your PP work reminds me infrared photos, I also like the compositions I bought an IR filter a short time ago and I will try some shots when I learn the special IR PP workflow. I have been watching some IR images on the internet recently and may be that's why I feel myself close to your PP style. I think #2 and #3 need some perspective correction though.

[Mike Buckley]

I was trying (perhaps failing) to make it more interesting.

I think it's just a matter of which style a particular viewer prefers. One style is more traditional than the other, not necessarily more or less interesting.

[dje]

John I like these shots. Maybe some of the finer points on the processing are debatable as indicated by the discussion but overall I like them because they take us back a step in time and that I think was your intended purpose.

Nice work

Dave

[wilgk]

It is really interesting to see something that bit different. I am intrigued by the processing and admire your skill in both in Trial composition and final processing.
Nice work.

[IzzieK]

I prefer #1 but near the top, that bright reflection of the sky on the water is a little bit over exposed I think as my eyes went there too easily. The other two? I don't know...I like the building and surrounds part but not the water part I suppose...

[Bobobird]

Lovely b/w work.

[John 2]

Thanks all for the additional comments.

Binnur, your not far off the mark. I did push the yellow and green channels in the conversion as a starting point which is moving towards a quasi IR effect. I agree that the perspective correction isn't quite there but they have had quite a bit already. The trouble with pushing pixels around though is that you begin to lose quality (see the first compared to the others)so I guess these were a compromise.

Thanks Dave. That is what I was trying for. There are some mills that still have working machinery that I would lie to have a go at as well in the same vein.

Thanks all again.

Mike so true and it is a question of developing that style, I this case for architecture. I'm not quite there yet and so onward...

[John 2]

Thanks all for the additional comments.

Binnur, your not far off the mark. I did push the yellow and green channels in the conversion as a starting point which is moving towards a quasi IR effect. I agree that the perspective correction isn't quite there but they have had quite a bit already. The trouble with pushing pixels around though is that you begin to lose quality (see the first compared to the others)so I guess these were a compromise.

Mike so true and it is a question of developing that style, in this case for architecture. I'm not quite there yet and so onward...

Thanks Dave. That is what I was trying for. There are some mills that still have working machinery that I would like to have a go at as well in the same vein.

Thanks all again.

[Manfred M]

Thanks for these updates, John. I now understand as to what you were trying to accomplish (and why).

I feel that I sometimes fall into a similar "trap", defining a particular "look" I think I'm after, getting it to work to my liking in one specific image and then trying to continue the same approach in another image. Sometimes this works, but more often I find I fail miserably.

I've had some success in going about it in a slightly different direction and that is making the "look" decision when I photograph the scene and then sticking with that decision throughout the shooting process through to the PP stage. I find that when I do this, I make subtle changes in the capture process and somehow, I find the end results work out better (of course, I could just be fooling myself too).

[JBW]

The large white matte superb. The buildings, sky and various structures excellent.

The water in 1 very nice.

Water in 2 and 3 combines with the foliage, and here I am at a loss for words. But if it was a foreground background water foliage shot I would say it needed a greater DoF to separate the elements. ???

[John 2]

Thanks Manfred. It is certainly a thought. At the back of my mind I sometimes have the thought of creating a series - perhaps more of a portfolio - that has a theme e.g. steam trains or perhaps industrial buildings etc. etc. If I ever succeed, I would want to the theme to encompass treatment and the treatment to enhance the theme idea. Hence the reference to exploring in answer to one of Mike's posts above. Perhaps a stretch too far but success or not, it gives purpose to my efforts and more importantly for me as a none pro, it is enjoyable.

Brian, thank you. You have hit on a factor that I had not taken into account. I used a very wide lens but although that is able to capture the broad picture, it makes small detail less distinguishable. The water is probably the key in that a slower shutter speed would have helped this problem by blurring the water but not the leaves. I'll tuck that away for next time.

Generally, in terms of thoughts and learning, I have got more from this post than others that have been commented on. Thanks all for your input.

[JBW]