Alabama Hills 8 stitched images

[Steve Bein]

dawn with alpinlight on the Sierras with the foreground not lit yet. I took about 9 images on my 5D, rotated and overlapped, not scientifically as some, but visually overlapped. THe light was fanatstic. The full image has amazing detail, but the web sized one not as exciting. I expect to print it about 60"x15" and hand it in my living room. There is an amazing panoramic of the Alabama hills in bland light which is 8' high by about 56' handing in the Bradley terminal at LAX airport and it is disappointing since there is so much potential there and the photographer did only a fair job there. On the other hand, he sold the image and probably for a good price. Some burning and dodging to bring out the amazing details as it was seen.

5D
24-105mm @ 24mm
0.5 sec, f/16
Mode: Manual
Metering: Evaluative
ISO: 100

[Terry Eddington]

Nice color, great sense of depth pulling the eye into the shot. I can understand this needs for size for its' true impact but the detail in the foreground and the composition of the rest of the photo really work. Maybe you can convince the folks at Bradley to substitute your image!!

[Robert Amoruso]

Nice work here Steve. I don't really have any specific recommendations for improvement. Placement of the FG rocks are pleasing and help the viewer get into the image.

[Fabs Forns]

Steve, the color scheme here is the first thing that jumps to my eyes, very pleasing.

My eyes keep trying to connect the two rocks in the foreground, or at least see the base of them.

What a sky!!!!

[Jason Hahn]

Certainly an image I would like to see larger. This is one of the hard things about critiquing panos online, at this size I find my self struggling to make out the foreground details, and wishing I could see more, but am sure at full size they just blow you away. Great light, and I really like the sweep of rocks from the foreground leading you to the distant range.

Jason

[Fabs Forns]

Hey landscapes experts, may I chime in, just as an "outsider" opinion ;)

Although full size images are much more incredible in detail and beauty, I find small version easier when judging composition, and sometimes, what is not evident in a 800 px file, composition wise, jumps at you in a thumbnail size.

Just an observation :)

[Jason Hahn]

Hey landscapes experts, may I chime in, just as an "outsider" opinion ;)

Although full size images are much more incredible in detail and beauty, I find small version easier when judging composition, and sometimes, what is not evident in a 800 px file, composition wise, jumps at you in a thumbnail size.

Just an observation :)

For me, it is very much different for every image I look at. For my eye, images like silhouettes and such are immediately apparent in terms of composition at the small sizes. But in an image such as this where the composition is fairly straight forward, a large part of the beauty of it is in the detail and complexity of the foreground rocks. A lot of landscapes have such subtle compositional elements such as lines in rocks, the angles of branches, etc., that just aren't apparent in the thumbs.

Jason

[Steve Bein]

It is interesting that comments were made about the foreground rocks and wanting to see the bases. If they were included, then others would be there and their bases would be missing. That area is loaded with rock formations and I could not find a location where there were no cut off rock formations in the over 180 degrees for the panoramic image. That was a compromise that was forced on me. When I return and hopefully with a good sky situation, I will move to different locations and hopefully find the perfect place and do the stitching with vertical images. With something like this, perfect is not easy to find, if possible at all. it was a wonderful experience to be there at that time. I hope the weather cooperates next time. I have this printed 17inches by 80 inches, hanging in my living room.

[Jason Vaclavek]

This is such a cool place and I have been away from it for too long now!
Thanks for sharing this with me.