Colour or monochrome

[Davejl]

When I have shown landscape photos to work colleagues (not really photographers), black and white seems to have been more popular generally. I have a few shots that I've processed as both and wondered what other photographers think. Here is an example and here I think I prefer the colour version.

Ingleborough In Mist





(Taken with Fuji X100 on Gorillapod, 3 bracketed exposures, processed in Photomatix, B+W processed with Silver Efex)

[bnnrcn]

Certainly the color for me

[flashback]

B&W most definitely, so much more depth and detail.
Also, the foreground slanting down from right to left, the background slanting down from left to right just seems to work really well here.
One thing, in the upper RHS there appears to be some very straight lines in the sky, almost as though this were shot through a window and I'm seeing a reflection. The lines may in fact be quite natural but for me it's a bit distracting, I'd try to smudge them out a bit somehow.
Otherwise, I think this is a great shot and deserves to be printed and hung (largely)

[rachel]

Colour for me too. Nature is beautiful and very rarely do I see it better in B/W

[Wavelength]

color is pleasing, B&W is enigmatic.... i like both for different reasons... we see more details in clouds in B&W.

[Ziggy]

Color works for me.

[Davejl]

Hello Jack,

Thanks. I noticed the lines in the sky and my initial thoughts were that they weren't natural. In fact, it is some sort of layer of high thin cloud, possibly related to the fact that this place is actually quite close to the sea. Multi-layered skies are common here. But I do agree that the effect is a bit disconcerting because it can appear to be unnatural, so I'll have a go at changing it. Whilst the effect is visible in colour, I think the B+W has exaggerated it and not to advantage.

Dave

[Davejl]

Thanks for your comments. It is clearly a matter of personal preference. I must say that England, with its frequent lack of bright sunshine, is normally rather monochrome, so I like colour. But for drama and texture mono tends to come into its own.

[Shadowman]

B & W for me, the color version needs a bit more contrast.

[Davejl]

Hi John,

Yes, I suppose that was why I did a B+ W. It was one of those days when there was actually very little natural contrast in the scene.

Dave

[John 2]

Black and White for me Dave. The grittiness suits the subject and the lighting.

[DEAN01]

I like the black and white.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Dave,

I prefer the colour for the better foreground grass and rocks separation - although I feel it would benefit from some general and micro contrast enhancement - I note from EXIF you seem to be using Elements, so I guess you may not have access to a Clarity control in ACR to address the micro contrast, but you could achieve something similar in Elements with Sharpening > UnSharp Mask and use values along the lines of Amount 20%, Radius 40px, Threshold 0. Adjust Amount and Radius up/down until satisfied.

However, I do prefer the trees, sky and distant landscape in the B&W - perhaps addressing the contrast issues of the colour version as suggested would make that more successful in those areas too. In fact if you have a more recent PS editor, you could probably use the new 'Dehaze' control (with restraint) to improve things there.

Compositionally, I'm in two minds about the half tree on right hand edge, I think it wouldn't worry me so much if there were a similar tree at left edge - however, just cropping it off doesn't work, is there more of it to see? Just seeing the trunk may be sufficient - in fact that got me wondering whether to clone or paint in a trunk, if there's nothing extra that side in the capture. Although that's a pretty radical idea for some, I suspect.

The straight lines in the sky don't seem unusual to me, but then I live in UK and am used to seeing that sort of thing where the cause might be either banks of high cirrus clouds drifting across (as you suggest), or perhaps a dissolving (multiple) contrails from over flights, given that a lot of UK is situated under busy air lanes.

Hope those ramblings help, Dave

[Davejl]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for your comments. I could probably do with a more up-to-date editor (currently PSE7). I probably agree that the tree could be improved. However, I'm a bit of a purist and so am not really happy with cloning things out (other than any litter in my shots, I must confess, or even, less reasonably, I suppose, a flying bird smudge on occasion!). I know that some of the popular photo magazines sometimes encourage things like swapping a dull sky for a dramatic one. Again, I just wouldn't do that. But I will give your unsharp mask tip a go. I use UM for sharpening, but haven't used the setting you suggest for contrast.

On the subject of the sky, I see that you agree with me about the straight lines in the sky, and living in Windsor, you may be even more familiar with vapour trails than me! (When I visited Frogmore mausoleum, I was amazed that a plane almost seemed to clip the top of it). I think the lines in my shot are probably natural, but they might be plane-made. As you say, we in the UK are used to either variety.

Cheers,

Dave

[Rob Ekins]

I actually like the lack of contrast in the first, if it were mine I would go further.

There is a wonderful purple cast on the stone that I think works really well against the green grass that tells a story about the local environment, going B&W and especially over produced B&W can..... and in this case I think does, detract from the beauty of the area.

[IzzieK]

Colour version for me...since this is not a snow scene...might as well see some greens and other colouring in nature at this time of the year..

[Davejl]

Hi Robbie,

I agree with you. I do find the B+W more dramatic, but I think it was the sort of watercolour subtlety of the colour version which made me prefer it. The place looks more inviting in colour. It was a benign misty day with the promise of late sun (which I recall was not actually fulfilled!)

Dave