Emphasizing a subject

Is your question from an assignment set by your Teacher at a school or college?

 

WW

All the better to skirt Turnitin?

When working in color....

It is usually hard to emphasize a subject when photographing in black & white so I was wondering if anybody had tips on how I could try to put more emphasis on my subjects when photographing in black & white.

It is usually hard to emphasize a subject when photographing in black & white so I was wondering if anybody had tips on how I could try to put more emphasis on my subjects when photographing in black & white.

Well one way is to think about what you want to emphasize, or where you would like the viewers eye to go. You can use dodging, burning, contrast etc. to do that. Digital or film, makes no difference. Digital programs have the same digital tools that use to get used in analogue photography, just a lot more of them. And that's just post processing. When taking a pic, you'd want to be aware of the lighting and what's in the frame etc. composing, all that. Its funny that you say its difficult to emphasize a subject in b/w. I don't think its more difficult, maybe even easier.

Edited November 20, 2020 by http://www.photo.net/barryfisher

Neutral image of thistles as shot and with the subjects emphasized.

Darkened, (Gaussian) blurred, and lowered contrast of background.

Sharpened, lightened, and increased contrast of thistles.

 

(P.S., a thistle is not a monocotyledon but a dicotyledon)

Edited November 20, 2020 by Glenn McCreery

Neutral image of thistles as shot and with the subjects emphasized.

Darkened, (Gaussian) blurred, and lowered contrast of background.

Sharpened, lightened, and increased contrast of thistles.

Try doing that under the enlarger in a 20 second exposure and with a bit of card on a length of wire!

 

Do four-leaf clovers start out as tetracotyledons?

Tricotyledons?

As usual, the last time the OP was seen was when they posted the question.

Why do they bother asking if they are not going to join the discussion or look at the answers?

 

But, it can be interesting to see the responses.

As usual, the last time the OP was seen was when they posted the question.

 

That is incorrect on both accusations contained in the statement.

 

Firstly it is not 'as usual' and secondly the OP 'was seen' on Wednesday, this week.

 

Additionally, the OP responded to several posts up to and including Post #11.

 

. . . Why do they bother asking if they are not going to join the discussion or look at the answers?

 

As one answer to your question as it was posed - erroneous accusations (see above) and terse comments, such as the one directly above, are likely not encouraging for a new member to 'join the discussion'.

 

Moreover '[not] look[ing] at the answers' is yet another erroneous accusation - it is fact that the OP must have looked at answers up to and including Post #11, and speculation only that s/he has not read further.

 

WW

I stand chastised. I missed that in this particular case they posted a few likes.

BTW, it is usual, no matter your rebutal.

I stand by my statement that they don't normally join in the conversation and it hardly then matters if it is encouraging or not...

Whatever.

I see you selectively omitted my 'But, it can be interesting to see the responses'.

Well played.

Try doing that under the enlarger in a 20 second exposure and with a bit of card on a length of wire!

 

Do four-leaf clovers start out as tetracotyledons?

Tricotyledons?

 

I used to do a lot of black and white darkroom work back in my film era and can see wasting a lot of enlarging paper trying to do this. I think that ti would require a dodging tool with 5 separate black pieces that match each of the 5 thistle projections on the easel. If I tried to dodge one thistle at a time, the other thistles would end up being overexposed. Perhaps a glass plate with 5 blobs painted on? But then reflections from the glass might be a problem.

 

From a Google search,

 

"The three leaf clover (Trifolium repens) is a dicotyledonous plant.

This applies to both the Three Leaf and "lucky" Four Leaf clover - which is a genetic mutation of the three leaf variety".

I see you selectively omitted my 'But, it can be interesting to see the responses'. Well played

 

It wasn't intended to be 'well played'.

 

I agree that the responses are interesting.

 

I assumed, considering that my replies were directed to specifically quoted, select individual statements, it was obvious I chose to not comment this particular statement.

 

I further assumed, considering that I am/was at odds with all that I selected to comment upon, it was obvious that I was in concert with the responses being interesting.

 

WW

Recalling my own film processing and enlarging days, I seem to remember that printing dark, then selectively enhancing selected areas with very weak Farmer's Reducer could achieve this kind of result, with much trial and error.

Try doing that under the enlarger in a 20 second exposure and with a bit of card on a length of wire!

 

Do four-leaf clovers start out as tetracotyledons?

Tricotyledons?

Cut your light intensity a stop and you have 40 seconds to move your dodging and/or burning tools. It just might take a couple of hours to figure out the moves to do it and a bunch of paper :).