Today was the first really warm spring day with temperatures above 20° C (68° F) which means an explosive developement of the vegetation – my nose feels this earlier than it becomes visible. Anyhow, the soft light around sunset was inviting enough for a walk, where this tree saw me, maybe 150m from home. It may serve also as an illustration for a topic that was recently discussed on the Landscapist’s blog: the question of color accuracy. The software I use for raw conversion, bibble5, offers several basic color characteristics, on which one can base the treatment of each image. For me the ‘product reduced’ way is in most cases the profile to start with, while the ‘product’ profile (to the right) starts with a clearly higher saturation, but still within the correct range, according to my memory. Much more than the question of accuracy I ask the question of purpose. In this image, the subtle grace, the fine patterns and textures of the bark on the stem, all get supported by choosing the variant with the lower saturation. It could well be that the color in the sample to the right is more correct, for example I did not pay attention to the color of the junctions between stem and branches, but from my gut’s feeling, the impression of the big image comes closer to what resonated within me when making this image. Color accuracy here certainly is of secondary importance.
4 comments
An intriguing composition, and I agree about the subtlety. As to the composition, you have both symmetry and asymmetry here, in complex interaction, and repeating structures as well. Captivating!
And, in addition to your thoughts, it raises the question of what actually is “the correct” color. I mean, for a concept such as “color” which has its physical connection only in a series of neurotransmitter bursts in a couple of brain cells… it might be quite hard to define it’s “true” value anyway.
So, for us photographers-for-the-joy-of-it I would say “anything goes”, as long as the resulting photo hits the right nerve.
Thomas, even objectively color changes with the light and the surroundings, and if you add the psychology of perception into the equation, we will soon arrive at “anything goes” – but still can’t explain the “why it works”
An intriguing composition, and I agree about the subtlety. As to the composition, you have both symmetry and asymmetry here, in complex interaction, and repeating structures as well. Captivating!
Juha, thanks. Retrospectively I can’t understand why I have passed this spot maybe 1000 times without noticing the potential image.
And, in addition to your thoughts, it raises the question of what actually is “the correct” color. I mean, for a concept such as “color” which has its physical connection only in a series of neurotransmitter bursts in a couple of brain cells… it might be quite hard to define it’s “true” value anyway.
So, for us photographers-for-the-joy-of-it I would say “anything goes”, as long as the resulting photo hits the right nerve.
Thomas, even objectively color changes with the light and the surroundings, and if you add the psychology of perception into the equation, we will soon arrive at “anything goes” – but still can’t explain the “why it works”