this part is a little overdone.
Yes I figured that's what you meant. I suppose the idea was to stylize it as bit more than a standard b&w edit would, and so going slightly stronger on the eyes was part of that overall look I was going for.
But of course, that depends on the purpose of your edit. In my case, it was simply practice.
I have no problems with how you processed the image to B&W. IMHO, if that's what you set out to do, you displayed good craftsmanship, as did the photographer. If you set out to emulate Lee Jeffries work, from what I remember, he tends to crop much more closely and many (most) of his street people subjects are looking straight at the camera, not away from it.
Ah yes, but it wasn't shot with the post-processing in mind, that was just my interpretation and I was more interested in just practicing the different ways of working with the light in PS, rather than achieving a close-as-possible emulation of JF's work. It's just whenever I do some B&W I immediately have his stuff in front of my inner eye...
That being said, there is a lot of subjectivity and opinion involved in the basic decisions to (a) take such a photo; and (b) convert it to B&W vs. leaving it in color.
Although I don't know the relationship of the photographer to the sitter or the circumstances of the shot (eg, was it a shot of the photographer's grandmother or a street shot of a homeless woman), many photographers and critics feel that photos of old wrinkled folks can easily fall into stereotyping the subject, perhaps, even to the point of degrading / exploiting them. In addition, many would argue that these types of photos are "easy shots" taken by less experienced photographers who, for their own betterment, want to emulate well known photographers who actually are socially conscious.
Granted. And again, my interpretation is not meant to support any agenda or social point, nor is it used commercially or for any other purpose than as a conducive subject for practicing my processing techniques.
In addition, conversion to a B&W with exaggerated local contrast (to exaggerate the old weathered / wrinkled look) is, IMHO, a cliche at this point. It's been overused. Every kid with a camera that thinks he's a street photographer knows how to light a subject and process the resulting file to get this look.
That surprises me a little. I have seen a few people do this, but not many, certainly not "[e]very kid with a camera that thinks he's a street photographer". In my experience they tend to focus on very different styles, especially when it comes to street photography, where it's not the local contrast they are after but the overall exposures in the wider scene.
But yea, I suppose Jeffries' look specifically has gotten popular very fast. That doesn't mean, however, that we shouldn't use it when it helps us learn, or in order to explore various styles and techniques to find our own styles.
Again, not trying to ride a gravy train here, just practicing, learning.
If it were mine, about the only things I would do would be to crop more closely, goose up the colors a bit, and put a bit more light on the eyes (It's almost impossible to go wrong by doing this in a portrait).
I can see how the closer crop works as well. I particularly liked some empty space in front of her (The original photo's crop was also mine).
Not so sure about your colors, though. For my own taste a little too much green and yellow. But it's a different interpretation which would probably serve different purposes quite well.
Thanks for the feedback guys.
