Driftwood

[tbob]

I was visiting my mom and sister on Hornby Island (one of the islands in the Salish Sea between mainland BC and Vancouver Island). I missed the ferry by three cars (drat!) so I decided to spend the hour walking about on the seashore rather than fuming in the car. My theory is every minute spent sitting waiting for ferries, 100 essential neurons die from boredom.

Found this just beside the ferry dock. I wonder how many thousands of people have seen this log?

Black and white for texture


And colour, for other essential bits

[Shadowman]

Hey if you've got a camera in hand there's no such thing as wasted time. Nicely seen and captured, I would try to pull a few more specks of black in this one, there's just enough detail in the shadows so I might concentrate in the dark notch in the middle of the log or in the background.

[Bobobird]

+++++
Never a wasted minute in a car if possible unless I want a short snooze or rest up a bit. Glove compartment has an old s90, pants have the cell phone, boot always has a dslr or 2 plus one or 2 long lens. But as I get older the will sometimes does get weaker.

[Manfred M]

I know what you mean. I had exactly the same thing happen a couple of weeks ago, although my miss was 6 cars.

Wandering around with my camera got me some of the best shots of the day and I had to hurry back to the car quite quickly as I had waited for the incoming ferry to start unloading cars before I headed back to my car.

I find that the colour shot is the stronger of the two. The driftwood you shot was quite monochromatic, so the warmer tones that are along the top and bottom give the image something that missing in the monochrome version.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Trevor,

It works and the colour is better, but I think that's because the colours attract our attention away from what I perceive as a slight "lack of DoF" issue; the knobbly bit closest to us isn't as sharp as I feel it ought to be (at least to my eyes).

I see from EXIF it was shot at f/5 at 200 iso, with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy for me to suggest f/10 at 800 iso might have helped.

If mine, I'd have cloned out that little loop of bright twig intruding lower left corner, or severely 'burned' it.

HTH,
Dave

My little S100 is always on my belt

[tbob]

I find that the colour shot is the stronger of the two. The driftwood you shot was quite monochromatic, so the warmer tones that are along the top and bottom give the image something that missing in the monochrome version.

Monochrome is still a work in progress for me. This one appeals to me despite the marginal tone variation Did try to increase the tonal range even more in processing but I did not like results as it was too contrasted . From an aesthetic point of view, at least for me, the subtle variation works as no one area is dominant and the viewer can range over the whole image finding new bits.

In the original the log is very pale grey and very flat, took a bit of work to get any variation in tones and colour.

[tbob]

Hi Trevor,

It works and the colour is better, but I think that's because the colours attract our attention away from what I perceive as a slight "lack of DoF" issue; the knobbly bit closest to us isn't as sharp as I feel it ought to be (at least to my eyes).

I see from EXIF it was shot at f/5 at 200 iso, with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy for me to suggest f/10 at 800 iso might have helped.

If mine, I'd have cloned out that little loop of bright twig intruding lower left corner, or severely 'burned' it.

HTH,
Dave

My little S100 is always on my belt

I do agree Most of my stuff is shot at f13 or higher and I have a developed a feel for the point of focus at each aperture to give proper sharpness overall, at or least where it is vital. Larger apertures are alien territory and something I need to work on. I was disappointed when I got home to see the area of decreased sharpness in a vital area. However I thought the deficiencies were less than the merits and pressed onward

Trust your eagle eye to spot this , which is why I like posting here.

[Donald]

Not sure the subject was ever going to work as a B & W. Maybe if the light had been different you might have got more definition and tonal variation. As it was/is, I think the colour gives it interest and vitality.

[DanK]

I do agree Most of my stuff is shot at f13 or higher and I have a developed a feel for the point of focus at each aperture to give proper sharpness overall, at or least where it is vital. Larger apertures are alien territory and something I need to work on. I was disappointed when I got home to see the area of decreased sharpness in a vital area. However I thought the deficiencies were less than the merits and pressed onward

Trust your eagle eye to spot this , which is why I like posting here.

What you encountered is a mild version of what macro photographers face: as you get closer, DOF becomes narrower. For example, with my 5DIII and a 50 mm lens, at 10 ft DOF is 3.75 ft, while at 5 ft, it is 0.9 ft.

I've tried a number of shots like this, generally not ending up with anything I liked, but I use a tripod and a small aperture.

[tbob]

Not sure the subject was ever going to work as a B & W. Maybe if the light had been different you might have got more definition and tonal variation. As it was/is, I think the colour gives it interest and vitality.

I was hoping you would remark on this. I acquiesce to your (and Manfred"s plus pretty much everyone else's) superior knowledge.