Will you stop taking pictures?

[Tom Barry]

Our granddaughter, 1988. Pentax 645, Kodak PXP.
Will you stop taking pictures? by tombarry975, on Flickr

[Urbanflyer]

Love the face!

[Tom Barry]

Thanks. She was and is an expert at stink-eye.

[lovelife65]

Thanks. She was and is an expert at stink-eye.

LOL. Spunk. One thing I would do is remove as much of the other person in the photo as possible.

[Tom Barry]

Thanks. I thought about doing just what you suggested, but was too lazy to do it in PP.

[lovelife65]

Thanks. I thought about doing just what you suggested, but was too lazy to do it in PP.

HAHAH. It's a cute shot even so.

[William W]

Cute, good shot.

I agree with Sharon: I reckon a square crop could work well.

The Black and White conversion is very compressed, quite lacking in the right hand side (light tones).

Is your monitor calibrated?

This is a comment I make often regarding B&W conversions from colour digital files – the condensed and muddy mid range DR of the resultant B&W is rarely a good characteristic, in my view.

Here is an A/B with a square crop and a simple extension of the D/R at the RHS to include “white-white”.

The original is on the left:



WW

[Tom Barry]

Thanks for the comments. This was taken on Kodak plus x pro, not a color film. And no, my monitor is not calibrated..

[William W]

. . . This was taken on Kodak plus x pro, not a color film. And no, my monitor is not calibrated..

Thanks for the information: again says to self - "William - ask questions and never assume" - and also my brain went straight to the image and I missed the entire opening descriptive sentence. Take that as a compliment - the image grabbed me from the get go.

This has me really interested: is it possible to post an image of the neg?

What do you reckon - are there muddy mid-tones, or not? OK or not OK?

WW

[Tom Barry]

On my screen your version is a little bright to me, but it’s a matter of taste, I suppose. I do like the crop better than the original.

[William W]

OK understood, just for clarity, I am not debating the aesthetics of light and dark (brightness) per se: that's really difficult to do unless we both sit in front of the same screen.

What I am getting to is that it might be a matter of the screen settings.

How it looks on any screen doesn't change the fact that the (original) Image's Histogram is condensed in the middle and has no RHS.

That’s why I asked about the neg – it might be muddy soup or it might have a full range of grey tones, if the latter, then there probably is something which went out of control in the scanning and/or the subsequent post processing.

I don't mind if you want to drop the persuit - it is just that I am interested.

WW

[Tom Barry]

It was developed by Holland Photo 32 years ago. The same shop scanned it this month because I don’t have a medium-format scanner. I’m sure they did the best they could and I like the result. I don’t like blocked-up shadows in people pictures and that was in my mind when I processed the digital file.

[William W]

In any case - it's good moment of a cute child. Thanks for sharing it.

WW