Jump to content

4 Queens Redo


MrAndMrsIzzy

Recommended Posts

First image is the unedited (except for resizing to post) rescan. Image was captured in 1988 in Kenya (Maasai Mara) and unlike the first time, this scan is full frame (as opposed to cropped), scanned at a much higher resolution, and on a better scanner.

 

1848283655_N050A88x25HiRez2800Pnet.jpg.b74da24c1c0bf738a4284e2696e6a876.jpg

 

Second one is the edited version. Didn't really have to do much. Cropping obviously. Minor tweaking of brightness\contrast\noise etc. Incorporated some of the suggestions from the previous post. Scanner makes a difference.

 

N050A88x25HiRez2800-1SmallPNet.jpg.05629888ce4257b6a57e69776fbd18b5.jpg

Izzy From Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much better original scan, with a lot more information. I don't mind cropping the foreground a bit, especially to get rid of the bigger plants, though I question the extreme you went to. Alternatively, with some lighting effects, those plants could be less distracting and might add interest. You seem to want a more minimal approach. In any case, I think both the color and composition of the background adds a lot to the photo without getting away from a more minimal vision and I do miss all of it in your cropped version, which feels obviously cropped and a bit awkward for that obviousness.

 

There's a playfulness to the original colors and an impressionistic bent that seems to go along with your misty landscapes that you posted early on that inoneeye mentioned in his original critique of your previous scan of this. I think with not much work and a bit of nuance it could be a good companion piece to those. In any case, even without more work, with a mere foreground crop, I think you have a good and interesting photo that piques my imagination.

"You talkin' to me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much better original scan, with a lot more information. I don't mind cropping the foreground a bit, especially to get rid of the bigger plants, though I question the extreme you went to. Alternatively, with some lighting effects, those plants could be less distracting and might add interest. You seem to want a more minimal approach. In any case, I think both the color and composition of the background adds a lot to the photo without getting away from a more minimal vision and I do miss all of it in your cropped version, which feels obviously cropped and a bit awkward for that obviousness.

 

There's a playfulness to the original colors and an impressionistic bent that seems to go along with your misty landscapes that you posted early on that inoneeye mentioned in his original critique of your previous scan of this. I think with not much work and a bit of nuance it could be a good companion piece to those. In any case, even without more work, with a mere foreground crop, I think you have a good and interesting photo that piques my imagination.

 

Thank you. BTW, I am thinking of maybe doing a -2 version (this is a -1) with a little less cropping, but for the time being I'm going to concentrate on the keywording project (almost up to the 21st century with that one).

 

Oh! Nother BTW (in case anybody's interested). The 4 queens (from left to right) are, Victoria of England, Catherine The Great of Russia, Elizabeth The First of England, and Hatshepsut of Egypt.

Izzy From Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like how you handled the contrast and detail—it looks very good. The overall color still seems a bit blue to my eye. I’m guessing this was early morning? What film did you use? If it is pre-sunrise (or post-sunset or cloudy), the ambient light would have a bluish cast that the film would faithfully capture, but our eyes and brain would have largely cancelled out—the usual white-balance issue. This means that you have a lot of freedom of interpretation: you can edit for what the film recorded (making allowances for any blue-shift due to aging film), or you can edit for what you would likely have perceived when you were there, or you can go for whatever you’d like in-between.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another trick I forgot to mention: sometimes I have another frame taken under the same lighting conditions that has something in it that I know should be white or close-to-neutral gray. In Lightroom, I calibrate the white-balance to that, then apply the same white balance to the problematic frame. This usually appears to overcorrect for blue-light conditions, since our physiological white-balancing mechanisms don't seem to completely compensate for the ambient color temperature (or at least mine don't). But what it does do is establish an endpoint in the yellow direction--I'm always startled at how non-blue I can push it and still have realistic colors.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like how you handled the contrast and detail—it looks very good. The overall color still seems a bit blue to my eye. I’m guessing this was early morning? What film did you use? If it is pre-sunrise (or post-sunset or cloudy), the ambient light would have a bluish cast that the film would faithfully capture, but our eyes and brain would have largely cancelled out—the usual white-balance issue. This means that you have a lot of freedom of interpretation: you can edit for what the film recorded (making allowances for any blue-shift due to aging film), or you can edit for what you would likely have perceived when you were there, or you can go for whatever you’d like in-between.

 

Thank you. Film's marked "Kodak CM 400 5079" (whatever that means) and most likely gray market. As for the time of day, I don't remember exactly, but it was probably around mid-morning (or close to it)

Izzy From Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow big difference here from the 1st posting of this old photo. Much better all the way around- the color, detail, & general feel are Way better here. I'm with Sam, I feel like this new crop is a bit severe. I get that the large plants in the foreground are a bit... something. awkward, maybe? I like some of the background elements and feel like the "bigger" picture happens to fully portray the scene- like we lose more than a little something in the heavy crop. It's a shot of the veldt so I guess I want to actually see that in the shot- which your full photo delivers. Cropping that stuff out of the pic, those lionesses could be in a park in Cleveland- or anywhere, for all we know. I guess I'm trying to say the background adds context and completes the scene.

 

Far as my opinion goes of the stuff you've posted, they all seem like old shots you're digging up out of the archives. Judging from what I see with this photo alone- I'm fairly certain all would be best served if you rescanned the negatives and presented them anew rather than posting a faded old pic from the 80s (or whenever). I know it's a fair amount of work but you seem to be revisiting your photos from past adventures anyway so why not refresh whatever you pull out? Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another trick I forgot to mention: sometimes I have another frame taken under the same lighting conditions that has something in it that I know should be white or close-to-neutral gray. In Lightroom, I calibrate the white-balance to that, then apply the same white balance to the problematic frame. This usually appears to overcorrect for blue-light conditions, since our physiological white-balancing mechanisms don't seem to completely compensate for the ambient color temperature (or at least mine don't). But what it does do is establish an endpoint in the yellow direction--I'm always startled at how non-blue I can push it and still have realistic colors.

 

Thank you! That information's going in the notebook.

Izzy From Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow big difference here from the 1st posting of this old photo. Much better all the way around- the color, detail, & general feel are Way better here. I'm with Sam, I feel like this new crop is a bit severe. I get that the large plants in the foreground are a bit... something. awkward, maybe? I like some of the background elements and feel like the "bigger" picture happens to fully portray the scene- like we lose more than a little something in the heavy crop. It's a shot of the veldt so I guess I want to actually see that in the shot- which your full photo delivers. Cropping that stuff out of the pic, those lionesses could be in a park in Cleveland- or anywhere, for all we know. I guess I'm trying to say the background adds context and completes the scene.

 

Far as my opinion goes of the stuff you've posted, they all seem like old shots you're digging up out of the archives. Judging from what I see with this photo alone- I'm fairly certain all would be best served if you rescanned the negatives and presented them anew rather than posting a faded old pic from the 80s (or whenever). I know it's a fair amount of work but you seem to be revisiting your photos from past adventures anyway so why not refresh whatever you pull out? Just a thought.

 

 

Thank you. Regarding my crop and rescanning some of the old stuff (now that I found where they were). That is something I'm considering, but like I said in my reply to Sam, I'm going to concentrate on getting stuff keyworded first. I do however agree that my crop on this one is a bit much.

Izzy From Brooklyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...