[Zig]

As you can see, my style and subject have not evolved(evolution is an unscientific and unproven hypothesis though, right gang!).

1. Websized version of a 50MB mosaic I put together with PTGui; looks ace with the bottom edge 3 foot or so.



2. Low-light, f16 with the Canon wide-angle tele at about 12mm:

[Banded Drake]

great landscapes again . I am enjoying your b/w shots . Can you explain your conversions ? if not i understand . I have missed seeing your shots on here ..

..... Shawn

[Irma]

Beautiful both pictures... I like a lot the b&w, the composition is very interesting, and also the contrast in your pictures.
Casually few days ago I was working with a b&w picture of the forest and I find so difficult to get the right contrast.

[Zig]

You're both very gracious...brill to see you still out there and doin' it!
Irma, I've found the most problematical thing in landies is how black and white "sees" greens...result is often from a strating-point of too-high contrast..
Someone shooting mono film would perhaps shoot with a green filter: lightens the greens and lowers the contrast. Maybe thus try either messing about with the channels or indeed something else that simulates green filtration.
The other way I often go about it is to slightly over-expose in digital: the digi-domain is, for those used to slide film in particular, very forgiving and retains more highlight than shadow detail. I'll therefore start with a raw file that looks pale and low-contrast. The next step I take depends on what I want at the end: if sky is important to retain, I mess about with the channel mixer and lower the blues until I get some darker sky( try to get all the values adding up to 100% one way or another). Otherwise, I'll get in there dodging and burning: trial and error really... if all goes a bit too dark and contrasty, then just nip into Adjustments/Exposure/Gamma, and roll back the value to between 85 and 92-ish in the first instance: bingo, instant rescue(generally)
.(..BUT....
I would definitely say that if anyone wishes to really get to grips with mono landscapes, then learning how to develop mono film in a darkroom, with real smelly chemicals, is a real asset.)
As ever, getting the exposure right at the front end is the thing, as it saves much headache later on: cleverly enough, well-lit grass just happens to have a reflectivity of 18% grey: in other words, I find I'm rescued often by just metering off the grass, then going into manual.
I hope some of this is useful; I generally don't have any one thing I do, just mess around in the toolbox until what's on the screen matches as closely as possible to what you're seeing in your head!(well, that's what I do).

[Irma]

Thanks so much Zig for this precious explanations.

Right you are about the color, some colors in the flowers show much more detail in B&W than in color. As if you could make a finer contrast and work with texture much better.

I have to try. I have some pictures of fields and trees, I think they will do for a nice practice....

[Banded Drake]

Thanks for the info Zig ,
I think we basically convert the same way , i just dont play with the colors as much . I guess ill have to learn that .
Thanks again ...... Shawn