Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Colorado Landscapes  (Read 1206 times)
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« on: April 01, 2009, 06:41:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Right after I got my D700, I went to the Poudre River Canyon in Colorado and put the camera through its first trials ... There were some rookie mistakes ... but some interesting images as well.

Please let me know what you think ...

The first is a 5 shot panorama shot at sunset on a beautiful bend of the river:



This one is a "rookie mistake" that I think might work anyway ... I had never had a lens wider than 28mm and didn't really understand you shouldn't put a polarizing filter on a 17mm lens ... Does the steep gradient of the sky ruin the shot?



This was gonna be an HDR panorama, but it didn't work ... I did use HDR processing before sending to Silver EFX.



Thanks again!
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2009, 05:32:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry for the "bump", but I am really interested in hearing what folks think ...

or ... perhaps they are perfect and nobody has any criticism!

 
Logged
John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1030


« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2009, 06:08:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I like the last image best. It is well composed and the foreground rocks really stand out; if cropped, they can stand on their own as an image. Two points: the image does have a 3-D quality to it which strikes me as unrealistic for natural phenomena; this worked against you in the sky which is clearly black and gray as if it has a ghost echo.

The first image is beautiful and well composed. Even the left rock outcrop is minimal and blends right in. But the water strikes me as unrealistic in BW format. But that is just me, as I notice many BW images look unrealistic when it comes to moving water.

The second image just does not have the drawing power or interest of the other two. While your points on polarization are well taken, remember also that the sky naturally turns bluer as you look away from the sun, almost the same as at right angles to the sun. Polarization only becomes an issue when it is pronounced and excessive or improperly used to remove all or some spectral light that should be there. I note your second image looks better in BW, at least to me.

But overall, I think they are good images.

JMR
« Last Edit: April 02, 2009, 06:24:08 PM by John R » Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2009, 09:32:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John R
I like the last image best. It is well composed and the foreground rocks really stand out; if cropped, they can stand on their own as an image. Two points: the image does have a 3-D quality to it which strikes me as unrealistic for natural phenomena; this worked against you in the sky which is clearly black and gray as if it has a ghost echo.

The first image is beautiful and well composed. Even the left rock outcrop is minimal and blends right in. But the water strikes me as unrealistic in BW format. But that is just me, as I notice many BW images look unrealistic when it comes to moving water.

The second image just does not have the drawing power or interest of the other two. While your points on polarization are well taken, remember also that the sky naturally turns bluer as you look away from the sun, almost the same as at right angles to the sun. Polarization only becomes an issue when it is pronounced and excessive or improperly used to remove all or some spectral light that should be there. I note your second image looks better in BW, at least to me.

But overall, I think they are good images.

JMR
Interesting feedback ... I'll play with a B&W conversion on the second image and see what pops out ... I typically have to resist the urge to convert to B&W as that is my natural tendency - so you don't have to ask twice!  I've always though that an image that didn't work in B&W usually just doesn't work ... and I only leave images in color when I feel that the colors add to the overall intent.  My instinct is to convert almost everything to B&W - but the reality is that digital has forced me to dive into the world of color in a way that was a bit unexpected ... I have a lot left to learn and that is why it is fun, but I finally have my head around color spaces and output gamuts etc and I'm intrigued by color in a way that I never was before.

If it weren't for the dark sky, #2 would be my favorite with #1 a close second.  This was also partially caused by the polarizer I think.  As processed, I like image #1 the best.  It prints really well.

I'm gonna go back and work on #2 and #3, but I feel like #1 is as good as is gonna get.

Thanks!
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6201



WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 03, 2009, 06:30:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Interesting feedback ... I'll play with a B&W conversion on the second image and see what pops out ... I typically have to resist the urge to convert to B&W as that is my natural tendency - so you don't have to ask twice!  I've always though that an image that didn't work in B&W usually just doesn't work ... and I only leave images in color when I feel that the colors add to the overall intent.  My instinct is to convert almost everything to B&W - but the reality is that digital has forced me to dive into the world of color in a way that was a bit unexpected ... I have a lot left to learn and that is why it is fun, but I finally have my head around color spaces and output gamuts etc and I'm intrigued by color in a way that I never was before.

If it weren't for the dark sky, #2 would be my favorite with #1 a close second.  This was also partially caused by the polarizer I think.  As processed, I like image #1 the best.  It prints really well.

I'm gonna go back and work on #2 and #3, but I feel like #1 is as good as is gonna get.

Thanks!

I like 'em all pretty well, and I think that since photography is a graphic medium you're right that a photograph usually doesn't work if it doesn't work in black and white. If I were teaching photography my students would be shooting exclusively in black and white for the first year. On the other hand, there are a lot of times when color is pretty important.

I'm not sure number 2 isn't okay the way it is. My first thought was the same as John's -- look at it in B&W. I did that but when I convert it with Silver EFEX it looks like an infrared shot and the sky loses it's punch. I think it's an interesting bit of surrealism as it stands. The distortion from the 17mm adds to that feeling. #2 is my favorite -- especially because of the dark sky.
Logged

francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6799


« Reply #5 on: April 03, 2009, 07:05:59 AM »
ReplyReply

The first and last photos do stand out - for me. I'm not so positive on the second one. At least, the heavy polarization effet doesn't destroy it.
The contrast between the painterly river and the texture of the rest of the first photo is appealing. The last one is also great. It's my favourite.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2009, 07:06:57 AM by francois » Logged

Francois
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad