Grand Canyon

Here is one from Grand Canyon... I used Dynamic Photo HDR and tone mapping with multiple adjustments. Hope you like it...

Indranil, I like the rock details in the FG. I might try to open up some of the darker areas and add some USM if it were mine. It's great that you got some nice clouds.:) This is one of my favorite places to visit.

Nice vista Indranil, I might boost the vibrance or sat in the rocks a bit. And some good advice from Denise.

Good advice given above, love the wide open spaces! I like how the center cloud formation looks a lot like the canyon walls below. Good one!

Thanks all... appreciate it a lot. Here is a repost with the suggested changes...

Much better Indranil. Are the colours actually more saturated, or do you think these are accurate? As I remember the canyon it was much more vibrant. Maybe it was just the area I was in????

Repost looks much better to my eyes - I seem to remember the colours as being much more vibrant also - could be just the ol mind playing tricks on me though!!
Like it.

Jackie, Lance, the original was more vibrant. My HDR processing muddied the colors. The colors really come out well in late afternoon sun. Although this was taken later in the afternoon (around 5pm), sun was fairly high up. I will try and post a proper color adjusted version. Thanks for the feedback.

Hi Indranil. Overall pretty good image, but the almost perfectly straight and sharp horizon and seems to divide the image into two parts that somehow look like two images; there doesn't seem to be much to hold them together. Very strange, and it could very well be my individual perception, and how I expect things to get less defined with distance?
Anyway, I'm not sure if this is a HDR image or a simulated HDR. I'm thinking simulated, and if simulated HDR worked well I'd say forget the multiple exposures and go with it. I am not anywhere near that point, regardless of the software. If it was indeed done with multiple differently exposed images, something is wrong. With the dynamic range you shouldn't have dark areas with little detail as evident in your post.
My $.02. regards~Bill

Hi Bill, thanks for the comments. I see your point. You will be surprised how flat the rim is depending on the direction you are looking. This was taken from Mather point on south rim. Also, I was lucky to have those clouds to provide the depth. I did use three images for this HDR and you are correct about the dynamic range. It should not have the dark areas as it is in this. There are two reasons for this. Even with EC +1, I did not have enough exposure for the shadows given the light was already slanted creating strong shadows. Other shadows were caused by the clouds itself. Secondly, HDR processing created the problem as I tried to get more contrast while tone mapping. Thanks for looking and the feedback. Regards

Hi Indranil. You bring up interesting point concerning using just 3 images for HDR. I can see with the wide range of luminosity as in the scene here, I do see an advantage in maybe 5-7 images. Something like -3,-2,-1,0, +1, +2, +3 probably would have been much better. regards~Bill

Thanks Bill. I think more than 3 is ideal. However, with raw I created two additional ones adjusting the exposure and here is a repost fixing the earlier problem with the color and the vibrance. I used the latest CS5 HDR merge and tone mapping...

Indranil. Much better, and for some reason I don't get that sky/ landscape separation thing! It also looks like a HDR, as opposed to the first one. regards~Bill

Hi Indranil, I think that the last repost works the best. I have been shooting 5 images for my HDR's and then using Photomatix, producing tone mapped tifs and then maybe even running a curves adjustment if need be. Or, on a few, I have thrown out 2 of the exposures and just doing a 3 image tone mapped tif just to see if it is better and sometimes it is, don't ask me why but if you shoot 5 (or more) you have the flexibility.