Large Format Landscapes

[MumbleyJoe]

I went back and forth on that myself. I ended up keeping it in the frame as I felt it gave a bit more context to the area, but can also see it being a distraction. Thanks for the feedback.

[roteague]

I went back and forth on that myself. I ended up keeping it in the frame as I felt it gave a bit more context to the area, but can also see it being a distraction. Thanks for the feedback.

I agree with you as well. It gives some context to the location. Great work!

[lenser]

Joe, It's a great scene, but cropping and values can be your best friend. As you've already determined, your real subject here is the light. Just a suggestion, but enhancing that light by discarding what isn't "the light" and printing it much deeper to reveal the light bursting from the shadows may give you much more satisfaction.

Only my opinion, but from the scene, I think this reveals your real image...and a gorgeous one it is. Beautiful place and a wonderful image.

[roteague]

Joe, It's a great scene, but cropping and values can be your best friend. As you've already determined, your real subject here is the light. Just a suggestion, but enhancing that light by discarding what isn't "the light" and printing it much deeper to reveal the light bursting from the shadows may give you much more satisfaction.

Only my opinion, but from the scene, I think this reveals your real image...and a gorgeous one it is. Beautiful place and a wonderful image.

The problem with crop is, if you are looking for a "grand" landscape style of photograph, the crop destroys that. That's fine, if that is your vision. I personally prefer the grand landscape. However, I would make that area a bit darker.

[MumbleyJoe]

Well, I appreciate the depth of consideration from both of you (sincerely), I normally have a hard time getting anyone to engage beyond "Yay" or "Nay" level of discourse.

I have generally gone in the direction of the "grand landscape", particularly with Large Format, but have recently been trying to edit down and become more focused on singular or simpler elements of the scene. As such, the "to crop" or "not to crop" lies somewhat at the crossroads of that decision. When I cropped it last night (with my wife's input as well, which is nice as she was there when the photo was taken) we both preferred the more "open" view, despite my general move away from the broader landscape. That could also be our personal bias, as its a sort of souvenir of our backpacking trip as well as a stand-alone photograph, so the broader context means more to me. I essentially never tolerate blown-out skies either (part of the practical rationale for tighter framing is simply to keep the exposure within the narrow confines of slide-film exposure latitude). As it is, I like that the light is still somewhat 'soft' and 'subtle' here - as the sunset progressed it got more dramatic.

Anyhow, I'll leave it at that, as I don't want to imbue this with more importance that it warrants. Thanks for the feedback!

[seabird]

I think your online presentation of your images would be greatly improved if you abandoned the use of the faux frame and over matt. I find the use of those to be a great distraction which adds nothing to support the viewing enjoyment of your images.

Don Bryant

Hi Don,

Thanks for the comment

I do vascillate over this manner of presentation. But seeing as I decided to present the images this way on my website, its easier to just link to those images using [IMG] tags. Apologies if its distracting. I trust you still derived a *little* enjoyment from my images...

Regards

[roteague]

Nice images everyone

Here's the closest thing we've got to Ansel's tripod holes in Australia: My take on the vista that every tourist with a camera captures while in the Blue Mountains.



The Three Sisters, Echo Point, Blue Mountains, Australia NSW 2010

135/f5.6 Apo-Sironar-S on Linhof Super Tech IV
Ilford FP4+ (E.I. 64 ASA) in Rodinal 1+50

All and any comments welcome.

Cheers

Hope you don't mind if I setup in your tripod holes in about 3 weeks

[roteague]

I essentially never tolerate blown-out skies either (part of the practical rationale for tighter framing is simply to keep the exposure within the narrow confines of slide-film exposure latitude). As it is, I like that the light is still somewhat 'soft' and 'subtle' here - as the sunset progressed it got more dramatic.

Have you considered using a split neutral density filter to moderate the exposure latitude?

[Vaughn]

...As it is, I like that the light is still somewhat 'soft' and 'subtle' here - as the sunset progressed it got more dramatic..

I also like it as originally seen. Darkening the background with a split or graduated neutral density filter would have removed the sense of atmospheric distance -- visually flattening the image. A much better sense of distance and of place as it is now.

I went on my first family backback trip to this lake -- back in 1968 or thereabouts. Learned a lot on that trip, such as why one drinks from a stream above the trail -- not below it (after watching some mules piss in it!LOL!), back when we did not worry about treating the water! Even had a bear steal some of our food. My brother and I lashed some logs together and paddled around the lake. Lots of trails under my feet since then -- now I take my sons backpacking.

Vaughn

[sun of sand]

"I'd love to get some feedback if one stands out from the group to you"

water of the first or 2nd but color of first
sky of the last/4th

better more even light on the hills but early dawn still and perhaps with velvia

the only one i could look at for any length of time would be the first
super saturated reds andd greens disgust me


i like the crop eith the far "bowl" best