Still trying a decent B&W pic.

How do you know if it`s good enough? (Contrast, etc..)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

That's way too busy and contrasty for my tastes. My eyes get lost in the foliage but there really isn't anything interesting there.

Yeah. That`s what I thought. too much contrast there... Can anyone give a shot of it?

The first image is way too contrasty and the second is too muddy but I am assuming that is the original. I like the overall photo but I think it may have worked a little better if you were closer in on the guy walking IMO.

I don't really know what I am doing but here would be my attempt to edit. I basically took your second version and played with the levels and a little contrast to give it a some true Black and white.

Thanks for including the human scale figure. I would never have imagined these trees to be so majestic without that one figure.

BW does not work too well here as there is too much going on in terms of textural aspect of the shot.

What you may want to experiment (in color), however, is the fake tilt-shift, since this example may be conducive to that technique (focus on the scale figure). If you do it right, you might come away with a keeper.

Mu Eugene wrote in post #8901761
Thanks for including the human scale figure. I would never have imagined these trees to be so majestic without that one figure.

BW does not work too well here as there is too much going on in terms of textural aspect of the shot.

What you may want to experiment (in color), however, is the fake tilt-shift, since this example may be conducive to that technique (focus on the scale figure). If you do it right, you might come away with a keeper.

That old lady wasnt there when I took the pic.








Just kidding Well, I was expecting the leaves had turned yellow when I shot there. Yellow/green still So I decided to salvage the pics and tried B&W. Is there a technique to do B&w pictures? Should I shoot B&W on the camera setting first, if my intention is B&W? But you can`t make B&W shots to color though...

Gebber: Thanks. That`s a lot better i think.

IMO the subject is the tree lined road, not a bad subject, and I see value in it.

The first image pushes tonality and contrast to the higher and lower tones while the second version accentuates the mids. You will find that printing in B/W is harder because the absence of color must be compensated in shades of Gray. In my world this means that the graphic elements are even more significant because the differentiation in the eye due to color is missing.

Here is a list of books on B/W printing that serve as a real basis for understanding tonality and use in different photographic genres.

http://www.amazon.com …20white%20print​ing&page=1

I have a couple of favorites on my shelves which include Eddie Ephrams and Larry Bartlett.

http://www.amazon.com …d=1256665908&sr​=1-1-spell

http://www.amazon.com …ng-Workshop/dp/0863433669

Some photographers spend their entire lifetime in B/W.

I thought B&w is easy, it`s seems like a lot harder to manipulate than the color ones...

Jetcode: Thanks for the link. I might have to invest on few b&w book guides.

Here are a couple of links to the highly regarded B/W photographer Edward Steichen from the 20th century.

http://www.google.com …&ct=image&ved=0​CAkQ9QEwAA

http://topics.nytimes.​com …dward_steichen/​index.html

The Pond (seen in the first link) has sold for more than 2.9 million dollars. I believe there are only 3 prints in existence. I was lucky enough to see a Steichen portfolio in person. Very dark moody printing.