Next step up from Epson scanners

[Pere Casals]

I like the gold coming out in sunlight.

Steven, I only used (coarsely) the darkening tool and edited a bit the top of the red curve to make highlights warmer.

hmmm, this is a really great shot deserving an intense edition in the sky to make it dramatic. I was thinking... perhaps the whole sky also should be edited to attract in first place the viewer's attention to the highlights at left, making that area red it would lure the viewer to go there(also darkening highlights at right). When sight is exploring from left to right it feels more comfortable, as we are used to read from left to right. In the arabic world it's the counter, because they read to the left... Some cocacola advertisements (decades ago) were inverted left to right for the arabic world, to match their aesthetics. At least I was told that in a lesson on photography...

Sorry if I was making critique just pointing the choices we have from scanning/editing in 16 when a grad filter not there, or not enough.

[Pali K]

This would be my take on it. Used my typical ColorPerfect and Color Balance workflow documented here:
http://www.analogfilm.camera/2017/05...erfect-plugin/

Full Res Here

Pali

[Peter De Smidt]

Good job, Pali! To my eye, Steven's version has a strong magenta cast.

[Corran]

Agree very much with the above. It has a more natural color palette. All the tones are also there and not too dark or too light, and the sky looks natural and not overdone. Great job.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I think I tend toward a somewhat more ourple and magenta coloring. Why, I am not sure, but it seems thise are what I end up with. Partly I think because I find the warmer tones without magenta not pleasing. Not that I am right or anything, it just seems that is where I tend to fall. I like all the versions here so far.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

That is prettymuch how I use CP however, I create my scans with no assigned profile assigning it in PS right before I go into CP. I am going to calibrate my monitor to D50 instead of D65. If I still end up as usual then It is just what I prefer. Another thing I did notice is For this image I don't see a magenta cast and I do remeber trying to make sure it wasn't there, so I need to go back and look at what I did. I Also softproof to srgb before I create jpg with PS export command that assigns srgb. I did not notice any difference.

[Corran]

Color negative interpretation is hard to judge. Only you were there to see the actual colors, but of course our memory isn't perfect and you might not want to even have the same colors that you saw. Any interpretation presented by others is simply a reflection of their personal preferences and biases, which is also problematic depending on their monitor and calibration. And viewers may have a preference for different interpretations but if you don't like that interpretation, what do you do?

Personally, I prefer negative film for a pastel, softer look, with less overall contrast and saturation than one would normally "see." For contrast and saturation, slide film all the way. The image presented and interpreted seems to be leaning more towards what slide film would render.

In the spirit of trying to edit it towards what I would aim for using Portra, here is a quick edit from your original jpeg. Sorry, not really interested in downloading any massive tiff files at the moment on my rural internet.



Goal here was to punch up the reds as I remember seeing them at the Grand Canyon, along with a bit of contrast enhancement in the sky. Cropped to 2:3. Left the shadows open instead of crushing them down to lower zones.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

Corran, I agree on interpretation, part of why I asked for everyone to post up how they see it. I notice all interpretations are close to each other, except my sky which does need work. I sorta rushed it as it was late and I get up way to early for my day job. I also wanted to look awsy so I could "see the forrest" and lose any bias I had toward image from staring at it for a long time.

I felt I had too much purple in skys, but decided to see what others think.

I appreciate all the comments and involvement, next best thing short of mentoring. Here people are more honest than facebook, flickr, g+, etc which I prefer over getting my ego stroked. Reminds me to stay humble not arrogant.

This was shot on Portra 160 which I also prefer for scenes like this.

Your image looks good as well.

Ps,
This is something think could be part of critique thread. Not just comment/critique, but if op wants to make available his image then people can demonstrate what they are saying in words as well. But only if op is willing to do that. Generally I am.

[Corran]

Regarding the critique thread - while I think this could fall under critique it's a lot of general technique stuff and not so much about the image presented but any/all color negative material. My thought (though I don't "own" the thread) is to focus more on the specific images posted and more about the intent and "artistic" side of things, with a bit of technique thrown in when relevant (for example, if one had a short DOF and a busy background, a discussion on lens choice and aperture use would be technique-based but focused on the image specifics, not general preferences on lens choices and DOF).

[Alan Klein]

PAli THat's a great edit. YOu really got the shadows to lighten up well. I thought the originals were really crushed. But you saved them. Good exposure balance overall.