What I'm about to say is purely opinion. Additionally, I'd like to thank Ken for stepping up and discussing aesthetics with contributors to the image forum, even though I'm about to disagree with him. It would be easy as a moderator to limit oneself to refereeing things like the never-ending debate about what constitutes large format!
I also prefer the first version. I think it agrees with the subject in two ways. First, the light in a place like Joshua Tree IS harsh and contrasty, even with the ability of our eyes and brains to process scenes with high dynamic range. The subject matter is also very hard and unyielding. Because of these two things, I think that the first versio is more true to the subject and its geographical location.
Bookmarks