The rocks are beautifully detailed in the colour image…abstract but also sculptural

Elijah,

Thanks for your comments. I’m especially interested that you felt color lacking more in the second case, although I would have thought both monochrome versions about equally “unnatural.” Both scenes are, in reality, rather subdued in color. By way of experiment, I’ve exaggerated the saturation in the color version of the rock face.

The second image is better with color, I think. You can see that there is so much light there, that the lack of color appears “unnatural,” debilitating, almost ridiculous. It’s sort of obvious that something is missing.

The first image in my opinion is better in b&w. This is a case when less is more: the photo is about mood, gloomy and dark, and decolorization adds solemnity and emphasizes the mood (although flattens the image a little bit).

My, what a little tint can do. Scrolling back and forth between the two cottonwoods images produced a thought. The top shot Is highly associative: I tend to be there with the birds on a blustery morn or eve. The b/w version takes me out of Montana and into a more artificial setting where a different mindset applies.

The rocks present a different issue for me. I love the shape of the land in those parts. Instead of rounding down to mush, the rocks are knapped and spalled by the elements into sharply defined edges and planes. The monumental is everywhere. But your Anasazi (sp) series powerfully illustrates the contribution that a least human presence can make in the life of an image. Here the cliff is left on its own to tell the tale. Something meteorological, biologicaL or artifactual is waiting to appear. But I’m well aware of the challenge that such mocking rocks can throw down.

As to color, the rocks looks retouched and quite successful. The cliff face can’t compete with the cottonwood for content and the color tends to fill the glass. But I might suggest Photoshopping eyeballs onto the rocks for a mighty nice added touch.