There is something about this shot I like but it really doesn't move me.   I prefer the bw since it seems to have more character.

Please feel free to crit honestly and provide your version if that will help.       TomDart.

The black and white one.    I got digusted with this shot and tried to delete the thread...well, my second post(eidted here) prevented that from happening. 

Any thoughts on the shot will be appreciated.

I like the B&W one better, how did you do the conversion?

Question the question. Answer the question. Question the answer...

I wish I knew what I was gonna say :oP

I like the b+w one too, but I had a play around with the colour version. Mostly I just made some copies of the background layer and messed around with blending modes and added layer masks to hide the effect where I didn't want it. Then I warmed it slightly, I think fairly happy with it now,

www.natural-photo.co.uk

"Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships.  ~Ansel Adams"

hello TomDart !

there is a little try with your. Ok, i treated it in my own style of BW. It's just an idea, a possibility.

Hope you will like it ;o) and it will help you to decide.

Seeya !
Olivier

Buddy I guess you've got that thing where you've expecting something and just not getting what you envision? I think this is a great shot and really love the way Olivier has done the B&W so we'll have to ask him just how he does it now

I payed to get myself into an institution :m_tear: Check out my temporary site: APACHA

Hi Short Ribs !

thank ;o) the way was not so easy : level, contrast, re-level, faded gaussian blur , some part of the pic has been worked with density - , some with density + , and a little bit of filter 'accentuation'.
Plus a layers (transparent for 30%) for a 'vignettage', where i've erased some parts, to enhance the lights zones.
that's all ;o)

Yes, you've got some samples now ... feel your choice my friend :oD

I like both the color try and the bw try you folks posted. Both are improvements in the originals.

My bw conversion was a fairly straight forward channel mixer adjustment in layers, with a touch high pass filter and finally sharpening a little.    

I had reached a point like Short Ribs said, expecting something and not getting what was envisioned...then burned out a little.    

Oliver and Astro, if you  don't mnd, I will download  your remakes just to compare with my shot when I have a "free" head to mess with it more.  I suppose sometimes we need to get away from a shot for a while and take a fresh look.            Tom.

Sorry for the big file. I did compress it to some 70 but gouing lower destroys too much detail.

I downloaded your original, opened it in PS and looked at the channels. The blue one was the most contrasty, so I copied it and loaded it as a selection. Then back to Layers, I duplicated the layer with your pic and added a layer mask The selection is automatically loaded. This gives a superb mask to enhance depending on the lightness of the work. I set the mode to Multiply. Thedarker parts would not be touched too much by this (black in the mask conceals). The lighter in the pic, the more it would be influenced.
The I added another copy, upped the saturation and changed the hue to greenish. With a mask I took care that only the front water was influenced. (all black with a large soft brush except the water at the front.)

Finally I cropped a bit as the light at the top distracted my attention.

It's a quick indication of a possible road. The lights on the rocks are a bit burned out and should be taken care of. Etc etc.

But this is a great capture, and very inspiring. It's always better to expect something and not getting what you envision than not to expect anything and whash away into total lethargy. Wer'e here to practice, not to be perfect! Cheer up, man: you're one of life's sublime miracles!

There are no Borg. All resistance is fertile.

I forgot: instead of using hue and saturation, you can use the channel mixer.
To enhance the colours in an image, you can up the slider for the channel and bring the others half of that value down. Then you can tweak with composite.

example: choose the Red channel (top dropdown list). Set the Red slider to, say, 116. Then you have to bring the other two down with 16 in total, if not you change the brightness, or -8 for Green and -8 for Blue. (you can of course play here as you fancy as long as the global plus and minus balance each other. ie: Green -6 and Blue -10)
Do the same for Green: up the Green slider with a value and see that you down the others so that the sum equals that amount. This does not have to be the same as Red!.
Then the same for Blue.

When you give all three the same value up, and the other two for that channel down, for example:

R +16 -8 -8
G -8 +16 -8
B -8 -8 +16

you have a pure saturation result.

When the differ and you start playing with composite (at the bottom) you can change the hue.

Some will say that the advantage is that you have more control, others that you have more space to play in.

This method is meant for subtle changes. Theoretically you can desaturate or oversaturate a lot, but that's not the intention.

There are no Borg. All resistance is fertile.

Thanks, Tan.  Good tips on ways and means.     Tom

hey ;o)

no problem for me Tom ! Use it as you want :o) it was made just for you :oD