On the way to the bagel shop, this fence caught my attention, but I was visualizing it in B&W. Got home, and did what I expected to do but “something” was still lacking. On a whim, I went back to the color version. Ken Rockwell (who loves vivid) would say it’s too dull, but in reality it WAS dull.
My question:
Which, if either, is better? …and why?
Or, maybe (likely?) it’s not worthy of any further discussion.
D3M_4316 | 2024-08-20.nef (14.9 MB)
D3M_4316 | 2024-08-20.nef.dop (26.5 KB)
In this particular case I think I prefer the color version. The black and the white version doesn’t come across as all that interesting to my eyes, but I really like the color version.
Mark
I agree with you.
How about using the colour picker on the HSL wheel to select the green of the fence posts and then increasing the saturation of that narrow band of greens? That might give it a bit more pop.
Who needs Ken Rockwell, when I’ve got you? 
Over-done:
These are from my Nikon D3, 50mm f/2 standard lens.
As a whole, I don’t think this works in B&W but you might get something worthwhile in B&W if you can go back and reshoot close ups of the knots in the fence.
To illustrate, here’s a crop from your B&W version.
I agree with this.
Also you might get a stronger image if you shoot in portrait orientation in stead of landscape.
To illustrate just a quick crop and B&W conversion made in PhotoMator (sorry, I have only my iPad available right now, so no PhotoLab….)
I did notice the knots and details in the wood, but I was concentrating on the “full” image. I also noticed all the leaves up near the top, and shot this (un-edited) image:
I walk by this spot every few days, so getting a different view would be easy.
I talked myself out of doing the vertical orientation, so I never really gave it a chance. What’s shown above is the (un-edited) image I considered using. I’ll post the original below.
So much more to consider…
D3M_4322 | 2024-08-20.nef (13.1 MB)
To quote a famous photographer:
“If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.”
Robert Capa
This is both very good, and very bad, advice.
That advice will likely lead to more powerful photos, but in the case of Robert Capa:
On May 25, 1954, the regiment was passing through a dangerous area under fire when Capa decided to leave his jeep and go up the road to photograph the advance. Capa was killed when he stepped on a landmine near the road . He was 40 at the time of his death.
Each of us needs to consider our own “personal safety” at all times.
This reminds me of two things I wanted to send @Joanna:
I used to take chances years ago, which in retrospect were not very safe. At 80, I’m a lot more afraid than to do things that might backfire!
Sorry for the digression - later this week I will return to that spot and see if I can do better. I probably need to bring my close-up lens.
Oh, and after taking the fence photos, and after getting my bagels, I took the same alley while walking home, and found this scene right in front of me. It seemed to take forever to capture the image, and much longer to edit it so I was satisfied:
D3M_4324 | 2024-08-20.nef (13.6 MB)
D3M_4324 | 2024-08-20.nef.dop (16.0 KB)
I loved all the “confusion”, and the bike, and the plants, and the ropes, and there was too much there, so I simplified my edit. Then I noticed the colors were all blown out, so I had to un-do some of my settings.
I much prefer the original color version over the pop version. The main feature of this image for me is the fence, not the flora. I view the various leafing plants as only an enhancement to the fence and not a subject of equal value or interest. In my opinion, the bright popped version overcooks the leaves and distracts the eye from the main subject, the fence. Instead, I suggest adding a small amount of additional fine contrast to the original.
Mark
When I look at the color image, my eyes move quickly and randomly from one object to another. I would use the picture to quickly get back into the mental gears after a nap 
. Maybe it’s because the colors look a little more aggressive to me. I can look at the momochrome image much more calmly.
I think you’ll find what Herman was alluding to, with this subject, was far from dangerous, more something along these lines…
Sorry about the image quality but, even with Topaz, there weren’t too many pixels. Next time, take your D780.
Talking of which, here is my good friend and fellow LF photographer, Charles Twist, hanging on over the end of an empty swimming pool to get a shot of one of the changing cubicles…
I don’t know where to start, but here’s what I was going to post before reading these new responses. I was going to correct my previous image, but instead I decided to start all over again with a new virtual image, and without reading the previous responses, word for word, create an image that I am happy with:
I tried to not use Clearview Plus, and to only use Contrast, but I liked what a small amount of ClearView did to the wood. Joanna knows how to do the same thing with the fine contrast controls, but I’m not that smart/experienced.
Again:
D3M_4316 | 2024-08-20.nef (14.9 MB)
D3M_4316 | 2024-08-20.nef.dop (39.8 KB)
Next, a question for Joanna - yes, my D3 has 12 megapixels and my D780 has twice that, but regardless of which camera I am using, neither of those ideas will compare to what I can do simply by getting closer, and filling the screen with the detail?
You, and @herman are both right - no argument - but the best tool to improve this would be my feet. I hadn’t even considered getting that close earlier today, but now you’ve got me all excited about the possibility.
Anyway, the latest .NEF file and .dop file are posted above, and all of you are free to use them however you wish - if you have an idea, instead of hoping I will understand what you are thinking, just download the files and have at it. No matter what you do, I will NEVER complain; quite the opposite. Some people dump on me if I change their images - the reverse is NOT THAT WAY. I’d love to see how other people edit those scenes, and I’m always learning. Doesn’t mean I’ll agree, but I’ve got a wide-open mind.
Not that it matters all that much, but when I want to take vertical images, the D3 is so much more comfortable than my D780. Because of all the weight, I know for a fact it’s easier to hold the D3 much more “still”. D780 has a ton more dynamic range, so that backs up Joanna’s advice. If I take the D780, I always have a zoom on it. For the D3, I limit myself to only a “standard” 50mm lens, and have to zoom with my feet. All silly arguments, when I know for a fact the D780 is technically more capable. The D780 has a gazillion controls on it, while the D3 has a small fraction of that, and with the D3 I find I can do just about anything I want without going into the menu system. I like lots of buttons (most of the time).
Anyway, back to the main topic. Does the image I just posted above come closer to what so many of you are suggesting?
I’m sure you are correct, but I was thinking more of what Robert Capa meant when he wrote that. The photos Robert Capa took during the D-Day landings at Normandy were… I don’t even know the right word to use here:
Back to what you wrote though. Choices:
Just my opinion, perhaps a bit harsh……
If you want to show what a fence looks like you may get away with this boring image.
If you want something to print and display on one of the walls in your appartement you have a long way to go……
Well, take the time to experiment with the fine contrast sliders to see what they do, not forgetting that they are cumulative so you can use the global to reinforce the highlight, mid-tone and shadow if necessary.
The whole idea is to avoid raising graininess and edge effects. ClearView Plus was designed to lift detail out of mist and haze, not as a general contrast enhancer, even though many “perverted” it before micro-contrast and fine contrast came along.
Nothing can beat creating and framing the shot in the camera.
Rather than being lazy and shooting the “whole thing”, take time in the field and work out what you want to “focalise” on and then shooting only that. If you are attracted to a knot in the wood, fill the frame with that, taken at whatever angle you feel right. See my second extract from your image, where I deliberately skewed the lines of the planks to run diagonally.
Which now includes the shadow of, what I presume to be, a power cable running right across the length of the fence. This is distracting and could have been avoided by observation and noting the time of day that the sun produced that shadow, so that you could take the shot earlier or later.
Which is why I recommended that you got a battery grip for the D780. Here’s my D850 with grip…
It’s so much easier and more comfortable and, with the duplicated controls for the shutter, speed and aperture wheels, back button focusing, etc, it’s just like holding it in landscape.
But you are not obliged to know or use the “gazillion” controls. I don’t. I just use those that are the same essential controls as you find on any basic DSLR like the D3.
If you are using menus for day to day shooting on the D780, you are doing it wrong. I only ever rarely touch the menus on my D850 but, if I do, it will be for a specialised type of image like a multiple exposure, or in a studio situation. But never on a daily, or even weekly, basis.
Top of D3…
Top of D780…
Both with the everyday controls marked. What on earth are you doing that you feel requires using the menus anyway?
No.
