Big Bend II

[Michael Lloyd]

This was shot about 50 yards east of the Old Maverick Road between Luna's Jacal and Terlingua Abajo cutoff. Santa Elana Canyon is just out of frame to the right. Pano crop

EOS1DsMKIII manual
70-200mm f2.8l IS @ 70mm handheld

ISO 400
1/200s @f9

[Dave Mills]

Hi Michael, Nice overall view of the terrain. I would crop the sky down to a little above the band of clouds over the mountains. The image does look a bit flat due to the lack of sidelighting. This taken early or late would probably add greatly to the images impact.

[Julie Kenward]

Dave is right - this is a really nice landscape but the colors are a bit dull. Michael, you might try going to image/mode/LAB and then to image/apply image. That will convert your colors to LAB mode and that deepen and intensifies them. Then back down on the opacity some or change the blend mode to something softer then multiply until you get the level of intensity that seems to reflect the original scene.

(Just a little something I picked up at the Kelby online training classes we were discussing...)

[Michael Lloyd]

Well? This is one of those times where I don't think that we are seeing the same thing. I'm not trying to be combative. Not at all. I just have a different perspective in that I can see the full image on a calibrated EIZO and a calibrated Mac "big screen".

On my display's I was actually concerned that it looked a little "HDR'y" (not a big fan of that look) which obviously contradicts what you guys are seeing. I'm guessing that the conversion to JPG and posting here has done some damage to the file. Actually... when I put the website up next to the same image at full screen it definitely lacks contrast. It is flat as both of you have noted. I'm not sure what I could do about that.

One thing that I would note about the time of the shot. It was shot at 10:30ish in the morning. That's about as late as I usually like to shoot for keeps. For me, anything much later than that (timezone comes into play though) becomes documentation for places to return to more than an image that I want to keep or print. However, had I shot this much earlier the shadowing would not have been as subtle as I would like. I don't think the affects of the shadows are very representative in the posted version but it stands out in the original. The rim of the bowl would have been in deep shadow as well as the back side of the volcanic rock peak in the background. In this image, the shadows lightly define the edges of the volcanic rocks in the bowl as well as the peaks and cracks in the background. Fast forward to late in the evening (sun at about 45 degrees horizontal from the viewpoint of the photographer) and now the face of the volcanic rocks in the bowl will be fully lit. No shadows. No depth.

BTW- if you're in to Geology at all this was a wonderful spot to shoot. Erosion exposed a dome of volcanic lava in the surrounding limestone that makes up the sides of the bowl. The white streaks are ash deposits hardened into rock (called Tuft)

Thanks for giving me your thoughts. Julie, I may revisit the original with your suggestions. I wish you guys could see what I see on my displays. Even the little JPG has an almost HDR look to it. The colors pop. Such are the trial of posting to websites...

[Julie Kenward]

Yes, Michael, that does tend to happen...and that's why its so important to take all critiques into consideration but not to run and implement everything that is read here - use your best judgment and always remember that it's YOUR work and YOUR art - we are only bystanders looking on.

[Michael Lloyd]

Oh no... not here. You and everyone that comments are not bystanders to me. I value every critique. For instance, the crop suggestion was something that I took away from this thread.

Again... I wish that I could somehow get the original to show up here. It's got a lot of depth and a ton of color that isn't making it to this post.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Michael,
It's tough to get post to look like the original here becaus eof the 200KB size limitation......with all the textures in landscapes they always lose a little something. I think the reason the image does appear flat is the 10:30 time......especially in Texas where I'd imagine the sun gets "hot" pretty quickly....just like when I'm in Arizona and Utah. The shadows of the lower sun angle add a great amount of depth.......so compositionally....nothing wong here (do like the crop ideaq though).....just the added depth of the shadow would add another dimension.
Did I mention that I love the signature!

[Michael Lloyd]

Well... What's a good angle (http://www.susdesign.com/sunangle/)? At 10:30am (really close to what people in NM would call 9:30am btw) the sun is about 42 degrees in the sky. Is there a "good" angle for landscapes. I mean within reason. Straight up is obviously bad. Is there a do not exceed value to use as a reference?

I think the best way for me to get my head around this is to go back and shoot the scene earlier in the morning. I'm pretty confident that it won't be worth looking at if I go back in the late afternoon based on where the sun would be in the image. But... earlier in the morning might not be a bad idea. It certainly can't hurt. My hard head still says that the shadows in the posted image are washed out and that's a lot of why the posted image is so flat. They are much more prominent in the image I have on my hard drive. Oh darn... I have to go back to Big Bend. I hate when that happens... :D

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Michael,
Se if you can get there a 1/2 hour B4 sunrise or stay about 1/2 hour after sunset....w/o getting yourself killed or course.......that unusual glow and light......usually makes a huge difference.......but don't forget the split ND......normally the sky will be much brighter so use the ND to get them more into balance . I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the difference that time frame makes!

[Michael Lloyd]

OK... I ponied up and reworked the original image one more time. Cropped as suggested and punched up the contrast with a few little clicks and whatnot's :D Like Josey Wales said- Sometimes you gotta get mad dog mean :)

Howzat?

<edit> ehh... the sky is still a little washed out. I used the ND filter in ACR but its still gets lost in the conversion...

I'm going to give it a whirl the next time that I'm out there Roman. Hopefully within a week or so. As we discussed, the Chisos make sunrise a little later than one would think but that doesn't stop me from getting there early and shooting for a while. Who knows... I may just get something marvelous :D

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Michael,
Definitely helped in the FG.....now try a multipled layer on the sky and distant mountain....this will give you the last bit of depth you were looking for. Robert has it in the tutorial.....if you need more specifics......let me know.

[Michael Lloyd]

Thanks Roman,

I gave it a shot. I don't know if I did Robert's tutorial any justice (took a while to figure out which Mac key worked. I never did figure out the feather combination) Here's the result. The next one will be a different post and a different shot :D