Pete, I don't know why, but the sepia toning in this doesn't work for me. I've come back to it a number of times, thinking it might grow on me. I wonder if I'm stuck in a groove of associating sepia with old photographs or with subjects (historical buildings, for example) where the photographer wishes to convey an impression of an earlier time?
I do like the bands of texture in this, especially of the pale, winter-bare branches of the poplars which are the element that divides the bands to create the interest in this photograph.
Lesley, the association of sepia with age seems inextricable. I'd like to say it was why I chose to tone it this way — i.e. to convey the feel of the valley's history (and there was an element of that) — but the main reason was that it simply didn't work in colour. Well, I couldn't get the colours "right"; someone with a much better colour sense might have been able to manage it. A simple black and white conversion didn't work particularly well either, but I do quite like this. I think it's the textures and tones that appeal to me, and on reflection, it'd take a mightily sophisticated use of colour to add to that rather than detract.
Curiously, the photo always seems to work better for me when I actually view it rather than when I remember it. Perhaps I remember the colour (sepia) more vividly than I remember the tones and textures.
Thanks for your thoughts on this, Lesley. They've given me much to mull over, and though the photo does work for me, I'd begin to worry if everyone liked everything I did! It's good to hear differing views, and I do appreciate the thought that goes into your comments. :^)
Thanks for explaining why you used sepia, Pete. I always felt it should be a monochrome, but kept wondering how it would look in black and white. It's interesting that you found it didn't work very well.
It's the textures and tones that appeal to me, too.
Pete, I don't know why, but the sepia toning in this doesn't work for me. I've come back to it a number of times, thinking it might grow on me. I wonder if I'm stuck in a groove of associating sepia with old photographs or with subjects (historical buildings, for example) where the photographer wishes to convey an impression of an earlier time?
ReplyDeleteI do like the bands of texture in this, especially of the pale, winter-bare branches of the poplars which are the element that divides the bands to create the interest in this photograph.
Lesley, the association of sepia with age seems inextricable. I'd like to say it was why I chose to tone it this way — i.e. to convey the feel of the valley's history (and there was an element of that) — but the main reason was that it simply didn't work in colour. Well, I couldn't get the colours "right"; someone with a much better colour sense might have been able to manage it. A simple black and white conversion didn't work particularly well either, but I do quite like this. I think it's the textures and tones that appeal to me, and on reflection, it'd take a mightily sophisticated use of colour to add to that rather than detract.
ReplyDeleteCuriously, the photo always seems to work better for me when I actually view it rather than when I remember it. Perhaps I remember the colour (sepia) more vividly than I remember the tones and textures.
Thanks for your thoughts on this, Lesley. They've given me much to mull over, and though the photo does work for me, I'd begin to worry if everyone liked everything I did! It's good to hear differing views, and I do appreciate the thought that goes into your comments. :^)
Thanks for explaining why you used sepia, Pete. I always felt it should be a monochrome, but kept wondering how it would look in black and white. It's interesting that you found it didn't work very well.
ReplyDeleteIt's the textures and tones that appeal to me, too.