Love those Sunsets and Sunrises

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Most of the time we photographers run around endlessly and pointlessly trying to get to what we hope is going to be a good sunset or sunrise at our chosen location, only to find that the clouds gang up over the horizon just when you don't want them to and spoil the whole darn show. But very occasionally, you just happen to be in the right place at the right time and get to photograph one of those rare and amazing sunsets/sunrises that almost makes your eyeballs melt.

I have shot many sunsets and sunrises in my time, but this is one of the most colourful sunsets that I have ever seen and been able to photograph.

Updated image now here  

Dave

[Chairman Bill]

Admit it, you tipped a can of Tango over the lens

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Admit it, you tipped a can of Tango over the lens

No not Tango, not up here. It was Irn-Bru 

Dave

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I'll take your word, Dave. But those who won't read your story might find it a bit over-the-top (saturation, that is).

You see, it looks to me that you tried to open up a bit shadows in the first stretch of land in the background. Now, with such strong saturation, I would say that our perception would expect a much stronger, if not totally black silhouette. The second land/island, being more distant and hazy, could remain less dark, however. In other words, you can't have it both ways: strong, saturated colors and opened shadows. I mean, you obviously can, but the effect is not believable. Believe me

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

I'll take your word, Dave. But those who won't read your story might find it a bit over-the-top (saturation, that is).

You see, it looks to me that you tried to open up a bit shadows in the first stretch of land in the background. Now, with such strong saturation, I would say that our perception would expect a much stronger, if not totally black silhouette. The second land/island, being more distant and hazy, could remain less dark, however. In other words, you can't have it both ways: strong, saturated colors and opened shadows. I mean, you obviously can, but the effect is not believable. Believe me

Yes I agree it does look oversaturated and the land doesn't look black enough, I admit it. But the clouds were actually over the land and reflecting light back down onto it so perhaps that is the reason why - not all anomalies are the result of over shopping an image you know  

This was towards the end of the light show and so I was exposing the scene for several seconds, in fact I was overexposing it you might say - as it looked far better on my review screen and the cameras ability to see the fading light, than I was actually able to see with my eyes. So all I can say is it was what the camera was capturing, even though I have obviously worked it somewhat in post.

I will try a different version and show it here, because as I said, I must have well over a hundred shots of this sunset which really was amazing, but perhaps I have not done it the full justice it deserves. In fact I have a six or seven vertical shot pano of it from the beginning of the sunset - leave it with me and I will return with that one - which I now have done and replaced in the original post above 

Dave

[dhancock]

You might want to increase the contrast with a tool such as levels or curves.

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Thanks for the tip - and welcome to the forum.

Dave

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You might want to increase the contrast with a tool such as levels or curves.

+1

 

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

I'll take your word, Dave. But those who won't read your story might find it a bit over-the-top (saturation, that is).

You see, it looks to me that you tried to open up a bit shadows in the first stretch of land in the background. Now, with such strong saturation, I would say that our perception would expect a much stronger, if not totally black silhouette. The second land/island, being more distant and hazy, could remain less dark, however. In other words, you can't have it both ways: strong, saturated colors and opened shadows. I mean, you obviously can, but the effect is not believable. Believe me

What do you think to this version Slobodan? This is a stitched pano, so more to see and also about 15 minutes before the original version I posted before - also I didn't lean on the sliders quite so much  

Dave

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Also here are a couple of dawn shots, just to prove I really am one of those mad photographers that regularly gets up in the middle of the night to go out and stand there freezing my n**ts off just to take pictures  

Now with two slightly more saturated versions as per Slobodan's suggestion below, and I will leave the original two versions for people to compare should they wish to. I haven't gone overly mad with the colour boosts and I suppose if I am honest, the more colourful second versions are more like I remember both these dawn shoots to be, but then my wife is always telling me I have a vivid imagination  

These images now in sRGB  

Dave

[PhotoEcosse]

I suspect that you are pee-ing against the wind here, Dave. Those who know the area know just how dramatic sunrises and sunsets can be and you have captured a great one.

The problem is that cheating in Photoshop is so easy and so widespread nowadays that everybody assumes that some form of post-exposure processing has been used to produce such images.

I had a similar problem with images of Iceland's Blue Lagoon in a camera club competition - the judge simply would not believe they were not "enhanced".

I think the best philosophy is to regard your photographs simply as personal records. Every time you look at them they will remind you of the emotions you experienced when you saw the sunset or sunrise. What anyone else thinks matters not 1% of SFA.

Keep up the great work.

[stamper]

But we all have egos to a certain extent and like to get it massaged from time to time, thus we post here - and other forums - and hope we get more kudos than criticism. PhotoEcosse It looks like you were a little scarred by the judges comments. Your comment  "cheating in Photoshop" is over the top imo. If you post here then the members expect your image to be processed. If it isn't then you will generally advised to do so. I have taken images of a sunset that were as strong as Dave's and sometimes toned them down because they didn't look believable. Carry on putting images into contests. You can't win all the time. BTW Dave's images look believable to me and very likeable!

[PhotoEcosse]

PhotoEcosse It looks like you were a little scarred by the judges comments.

Not at all. I have infinitely more experience and photographic expertise than the vast majority of judges that I have encountered, so I am most unlikely to be "scarred" by anything they say.

That is not to say, however, that we cannot learn from the experience. The lesson I was passing on was simply that submitting a realistic photograph of a very dramatic landscape runs the risk of being accused of cheating or, if you prefer, manipulation.

[Chairman Bill]

I've had to tone down stuff, because the reality looked unbelievable. Dave's Skye stuff is clearly overly Photoshopped, and I know this 'cos it isn't overcast & raining in his images 

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

I've had to tone down stuff, because the reality looked unbelievable. Dave's Skye stuff is clearly overly Photoshopped, and I know this 'cos it isn't overcast & raining in his images 

Bill - please don't ever change, you posts are always guaranteed to make me smile 

Dave

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I do not see why you had to replace the OP photo? It was rather good. The fact that I would tweak it tiny little bit, either by decreasing red/orange saturation or by increasing the black point for the front strip of land, does not mean it is bad by any stretch of imagination.

The layering of those land strips appears now perfect in all three posted photos, btw. I would now top that by increasing sky saturation in all of them. I know, I am hard to please

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

I do not see why you had to replace the OP photo? It was rather good. The fact that I would tweak it tiny little bit, either by decreasing red/orange saturation or by increasing the black point for the front strip of land, does not mean it is bad by any stretch of imagination.

The layering of those land strips appears now perfect in all three posted photos, btw. I would now top that by increasing sky saturation in all of them. I know, I am hard to please

Yes Slobodan you are and I will.

Dave

[Tony Jay]

This is LuLa at its best.
Interesting images and highly entertaining repartee!

Tony Jay

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

This is LuLa at its best.
Interesting images and highly entertaining repartee!

Tony Jay

Amen!

[stamper]

Not at all. I have infinitely more experience and photographic expertise than the vast majority of judges that I have encountered, so I am most unlikely to be "scarred" by anything they say.

That is not to say, however, that we cannot learn from the experience. The lesson I was passing on was simply that submitting a realistic photograph of a very dramatic landscape runs the risk of being accused of cheating or, if you prefer, manipulation.

IMO the bottom line is that most of ones who accuse you of cheating have little or no knowledge of Photoshop and won't admit it. They are jealous of what you can achieve. I spent six years in a club. I was the first to put digital images into competitions and others followed. At first I and the others weren't a "danger" to the film photographers but when the digital photographers started winning contests the criticism started especially when digital slides were winning slide contests. Doomsday for them was when a professional wedding photographer judged a competition and stated that every image in a contest could have been improved with photoshop. No point in arguing with the anti Photoshop brigade. Smile because you are doing better than them and deep down they know it.