Large Format Landscapes

Thank you all. I did try to burn it down a bit, but there is just nothing there. I exposed for the darkest part of the Canyon and didn't have any filter adapter at the time to use my grand ND. This was a tuff shot. I have several others from this trip and vantage point I need to look at to see how the clouds and light changed as I waited for what I hope I caught as the "perfect" or "best" light and clouds. These clouds were moving fast and the scene was changing fairly quickly as I waited. Hope I didn't wait too long.

I've given my comments on the other thread but I'm confused as to why you say "there is just nothing there." On your previous edit the sky wasn't blown out there at all. The Portra has plenty of range in the highlights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

I've given my comments on the other thread but I'm confused as to why you say "there is just nothing there." On your previous edit the sky wasn't blown out there at all. The Portra has plenty of range in the highlights.

---

I will go back and look, but this part of the sky was essentially pure white to start with, if there was something there it was not much like 250-255, which is vaguely what I remember when I checked the original. But for sake of being thorough, I will check it again on the image just after I converted it with Colorperfect.

Look again at the conversion / edit Pali did:
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1473605

As well as yours:
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1473471

Both show clear tonality and room in the highlights to the upper right.

I honestly can't really understand your editing strategy so I can't be of much help diagnosing where the highlights get pushed to that extreme. I don't use ColorPerfect or any of that - I scan with a positive inversion setup on my scanner to get close to correct color and tone with no blown highlights or blocked shadows, and then make color curves and contrast layers to get the color and look right, with final d&b and the like at the end.

I just looked at my orginal edit and it is also "blown" out at 253-255. mostly 255 in that bright area. All the way back to the beginning the area is blown out however, it is slightly smaller than the above version. Nonetheless though it is blown out. I am surprised though more wasn't blown out since I metered on the darkest part of the canyon at zone v and used no filters. The brightest part of the sky was at least 10 stops brighter than where I measured the zone v.

I haven't taken both into PS to really measure but most likely the new edit simply has more of a "hotspot" due to pushing everything lower around it and so is more evident. Either way your negative film should still have plenty of range to not have blown out highlights there (if you wanted that). I am not making a judgement here just pointing it out. Sorry if this is more appropriate for your other thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corran

I haven't taken both into PS to really measure but most likely the new edit simply has more of a "hotspot" due to pushing everything lower around it and so is more evident. Either way your negative film should still have plenty of range to not have blown out highlights there (if you wanted that). I am not making a judgement here just pointing it out. Sorry if this is more appropriate for your other thread.

---

Your good. My strategy is more of how to manuver a viewer thru an image the way I want. I also do not adhere to rules likebtjirds, etc. Same for things being 255,255,255 or 0,0,0. If it looks right I keep it. If it doesn't I see where it got toasted and if it was me or image. As for color, I also don't necessarily hold to the color being correct like I was doing a product photograph. I have seen the Canyon stupid red in color and 10 minutes later as bland as gray paper. I go with what looks good and then show it get feedback and if I agree, I make changes, if not I don't.

I start by creating a raw scan and converting with Colorperfect, is it perfect? Who knows, but I get close and if I don't like conversion I can do again. Using scannervto convert I bake in recipe which meansvif I decide I don't lije I would need to rescan. I prefer not to do that. Less I touch negative the better.

Once converted, I create layer to do all of my dust removal on, tge create things lkke contrast nask, luminosity masks, dodge burn layets, etc. When I get to end, I can go back to any point change it undo it rearrange it, etc.

For completeness, I will look at scan again prior to convetson and even reconvert if I think worth it.

And my skin is thick. I put things out there to improve, not get butt hurt if you or someone else doesn't like. If I did, I would not post nor ask for opinions. Besides, I can imagine the greats had a fair share of oeople who hated their work. I know people who worship Ansel Adams and others who hate his work. I can take it or leave it, but in technical sense he was very good.

In short, I am not a conformist which means most people will not like what I do. On the other hand, this one photo has gotten more discussion here and elsewhere and had more emotional response than almost anything I have done to date. So to me me this is a good image. Most like the bright white spot, so not so much. Same for colors both original and this one.

I have not met you, but I find your crituques well thought out and not mean spirited, but rather tobe honest as you see it. And that is what being critiqued is about. I ask for it so I shall receive however, get pissy, rude or mean about my work and its a different story. No one needs to lije ny wirk and I need no one to valudate my work. Its for me formost and to share with others second.

Short version your good and I am sure I will be quite frustrating to you sometimes. Hooefully your more confused now than before. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steven Ruttenberg

Hooefully your more confused now than before. :D

---

Only slightly lol :rolleyes:

Cool. I will let you know how the reconvert works and if I decide to incorporate. This image could be a good example of a critique back and forth, etc.

One thought I had for the critique thread was that whomever posts image for critique if first time should alsi put up an artist statement so those who visit and or critique understand the photographer's vision so to speak. Can make critiquing easier if we know intent.

Yes, it is a passion. I just remember, can't please all of the people all of the time or hell, even some of the people some of the time! :D