Man - Color or Mono?

[Radtech1]

Still working on processing the several hundreds shots I got at the LA March For Peace. Here is another one that I think holds promise.This was during the Keynote speech by Arun Gandhi (Grandson of India's Mohand Mahatma Gandhi). I forget what sign he was holding, but I really like the intensity of attention in his eyes.

Specifically, does it work as a photo independent of the back story, and Color or Mono?

As always, Comment, Critique, Thoughts and Feelings welcome.

Rad

5d
1/125
f/8
800 asa
300mm (Canon 70-300 DO)

Color

http://h1.ripway.com/Radtech1/2007/ManPostProcess.jpg


Mono

http://h1.ripway.com/Radtech1/2007/ManPostProcessMono.jpg


Out of Camera

http://h1.ripway.com/Radtech1/2007/ManPreProcess.jpg

[D. Craig Flory]

That is a very intense face ! I like both the color and black & white versions ... good job on processing. With a face like his it needed some drama added.

[Grain]

The colour one for me, definately. Normally I love mono shots of faces like this but somehow you have managed to drag so much detail and intensity combined with a great colour rendition, for me its a winner. How did you get so much out of the shot?
Agree with D.Craig really dramatic look, wonderful.

The only thing I am not keen on is the forearm.

[ibdb]

I also vote for the color shot, though both are very well executed. While exaggerated, the colors still "feel" authentic to me, and I get a better sense of the man with those colors than without. Age and time are present in both faces, but the wear and tear of time seems better visible in color.

I would agree with Grain on the forearm, however. It is a little distracting to me. Somehow it seems like it's floating at a not quite natural distance from his face; almost enough to look like someone else's arm.

[Radtech1]

Thank you all for the compliments.

In a nutshell, the post processing consisted mostly of layering for contrast (soft light), a Dragan layer blended in at about 30% opacity, color-shifting the eyes, and high pass filtering.

For those mentioning the forearm, is this better? It is about a 15 minute job on the 800 pixel version - so if I wanted to do this for real I would put more effort in matching. Think of this as an "exploration of concept" version.

Better, worse?

Rad

[VFTT]

The forearm is distracting. As for teh color and B&W versions, I like the B&W. I think the color one looks kind of fake and over photoshoped to me.

- d

[Grain]

Impressive PP Rad. Before I would have said better without the arm, but now it looks like its missing something. Do you know what I mean? Maybe its the crop now the arm has gone.

[thrumyeye]

I really like the color version better. I love b&w and usually pick that over color, but somehow the picture lost some of the intensity in the eyes when converted. And I like it better with the arm in it. I didn't find it overly distracting, though it's quite noticeable. My eyes were drawn to his eyes first and foremost.

Without the arm, he's just a guy standing there looking up. With the arm, it just gives it more - like showing that he's perhaps reaching up to the heavens while praying or preaching or giving a speech - you know?

[ibdb]

I guess that Grain and I must see this the same way. With the arm removed, it seems a little too balanced/symmetrical. Given the two, I'd prefer the first color treatment (before amputation ;)). Looking at it again, I'm not sure I can envision any other composition (in camera, or through cropping in post) that would improve on what you have here. The arm still distracts me a little, but this isn't a studio pose, it's real life, captured with emotion.

[SaharaWizard]

I liked this photo so much that I spend some time on it. The dramatic expression on his face suggests a stronger presentation so here it is.
Red in this shot suites me more although white is equally powerful.
SW
PS. Copyright is entirely yours :)