Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: God Rays  (Read 2103 times)
Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697



WWW
« on: May 06, 2009, 11:08:03 AM »
ReplyReply

The following image was taken one day in Italy in the mountains in the area called Gran Sasso. It was dramatic weather just like the forecast promissing sun, clouds and rain. What do you think?

Logged

Dale_Cotton2
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2009, 12:52:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Beauty!

They're also called Jacob's Ladders.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3984



« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2009, 04:19:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: hkruse
The following image was taken one day in Italy in the mountains in the area called Gran Sasso. It was dramatic weather just like the forecast promissing sun, clouds and rain. What do you think?

Gorgeous. You could perhaps lose some of the foreground, though.

Jeremy
Logged
AndrewKulin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 333



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2009, 05:23:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I do not think you need to reduce the foreground, but I thought it to be unlevel.
I trust this was okay, and I straightened it out to what I thought the horizon should be.

Regards,

Andrew

[attachment=13523:original.jpg]
« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 05:24:31 PM by AndrewKulin » Logged

Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2009, 06:14:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: AndrewKulin
I do not think you need to reduce the foreground, but I thought it to be unlevel.
I trust this was okay, and I straightened it out to what I thought the horizon should be.

Regards,

Andrew

[attachment=13523:original.jpg]

Hi Andrew,

I agree with you on the foreground, of course.  I san't say for sure where the leveling shold be but I would say you can't be sure the background which you think is horizontal actually is. I know that the his part in the background is not level. As it falls down from a higher level from left to right. IN the mountains it is very difficult to know what is level unless you have a device that shows that. But is it really bothering you? I didn't see it that way. I think it is a matter of whether it looks right or not.
Logged

John R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1031


« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2009, 07:10:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: hkruse
Hi Andrew,

I agree with you on the foreground, of course.  I san't say for sure where the leveling shold be but I would say you can't be sure the background which you think is horizontal actually is. I know that the his part in the background is not level. As it falls down from a higher level from left to right. IN the mountains it is very difficult to know what is level unless you have a device that shows that. But is it really bothering you? I didn't see it that way. I think it is a matter of whether it looks right or not.
I think it is a fine image. Of course one can always wish for a better foreground, but one always has to deal with what is there. Not sure, but I detect the use of a split-neutral density filter. It is probably the only way to keep the exposure differences reasonable, am I right?

JMR
« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 08:28:12 PM by John R » Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2009, 08:46:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The rotated image does look more true-level than the original. When I'm doing these, the best I can do is make a change and save it, then compare any changed copies from time to time with the original, until I settle on the best rotation. If there's a quicker more reliable method, I'm interested.
Logged
jasonrandolph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 554


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2009, 02:13:21 AM »
ReplyReply

You've captured a beautiful moment!  I don't think there is anything wrong with the foreground; in fact, I think the plant growth there is vital to the composition.  As for leveling, there are multiple near-horizontal lines that could serve as a horizon line, and they're not parallel.  That leaves it up to the photographer's prerogative.  Both crops work for me, and neither detracts from the beauty you've captured!
Logged

Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2009, 05:23:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jasonrandolph
You've captured a beautiful moment!  I don't think there is anything wrong with the foreground; in fact, I think the plant growth there is vital to the composition.  As for leveling, there are multiple near-horizontal lines that could serve as a horizon line, and they're not parallel.  That leaves it up to the photographer's prerogative.  Both crops work for me, and neither detracts from the beauty you've captured!

Thanks and I agree on the plant in the foreground. It was very deliberate to place it where it is in the image. I also took some images without the plant and they look entirely different.
Logged

Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697



WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2009, 05:30:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
The rotated image does look more true-level than the original. When I'm doing these, the best I can do is make a change and save it, then compare any changed copies from time to time with the original, until I settle on the best rotation. If there's a quicker more reliable method, I'm interested.

The best method is to make sure that the camera is level when taking the image. But I can understand that there are different opinions about what is level in this case. But I know the area intimately and the place where I was standing was where the landscape was going downwards into the distance but also to the right. We had been going up and up from the right to left side in the image. So if I rotated as was suggested it may look right but it is not levelled horizontally.

It is taken on a workshop I conducted in Italy last year.

Logged

Justan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1875


WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2009, 05:04:44 PM »
ReplyReply

I like this photo. At first I debated if there was too much foreground, but the rich texture of the grasses is a core component in the composition and creates continuity between the foreground and background.

I shoot in the mountains a lot and there is rarely a level reference point. As a result I didnít give any consideration to the slope.

I do have one comment and that is that the mountain on the right may be a little too dark. There is some detail, what appears to be a road or drain that is too dark to make out. It could due to my monitor. I didnít notice this at first, but after coming back for repeated viewings I started to notice that I wanted to see more details in this part of the photo. A fine work, none the less and one that captures rich variety of tones and textures. Plus you can almost feel the cool breeze.
Logged

Hans Kruse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 697



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2009, 05:47:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Justan
I like this photo. At first I debated if there was too much foreground, but the rich texture of the grasses is a core component in the composition and creates continuity between the foreground and background.

I shoot in the mountains a lot and there is rarely a level reference point. As a result I didnít give any consideration to the slope.

I do have one comment and that is that the mountain on the right may be a little too dark. There is some detail, what appears to be a road or drain that is too dark to make out. It could due to my monitor. I didnít notice this at first, but after coming back for repeated viewings I started to notice that I wanted to see more details in this part of the photo. A fine work, none the less and one that captures rich variety of tones and textures. Plus you can almost feel the cool breeze.

Hi Justan,

Thanks for your comments. After having looked at the mountains at the right as you mention, I think you are right that adding a bit of light there would be good.
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad