question: the light on the wood,..is that diffused by a cloud?
or is this just timed right after the shade line hits you, or whats the story?
how are you getting that warm glow?
Amazing shot, great perspective! 5k years old and the rock still has sharp edges.
Now my real question: is this a case of you using fill flash to illuminate the wood or is this advanced curves adjustment layers at play?
So the story goes,
The wind was blowing about 50 knots and the light was creeping up the hill fast. I took the image when there was just a bit of sun sticking the wood, most of the sun was below the horizon though. This is what created the glow, which I embellished a tad in PS.
When I turned to walk higher up the hill a stronger gust struck and I was stopped dead in my tracks, any harder and I would still be up there plastered to the side of some Bristlecone stump
Phil near the top clutching his tripod:D
notice the speed ripple on his cheek
With the need to sprint up 200 meters of scree to catch that last 2 minutes of light, and with there only being 2 or 3 chunks of wood on that ridge, I'd have to imagine it's a 50/50 chance of being the same one.
. That was a scurry in a hurry. And I think the rale heard round the world as we made our way up that scree field at 11,000'!
Don't you think that these kind of shots lack scale ?
I saw the little clip and then, only then, I understood the size of the tree.
(Yes, it is the other one)
In this very picture I can see and feel that it must me rather large.
Well... rather large:D But what is rather large
How big is a person near the rock ?
This - can I say it is a problem ? - "problem" is common to many pictures of your beautiful landscape pictures.
Is it intentional ?
I understand that the introduction of scale in pictures as grand as these is very, very difficult.
Phil near the top clutching his tripod:D
notice the speed ripple on his cheek
What this picture does not show was that I wasn't actually smiling the wind was blowing so bad my face felt like the pictures you see of the astronauts in the centrifuge.
-Philip
If you want to see paradise simply look around and see it.
-Willy Wonka
What this picture does not show was that I wasn't actually smiling the wind was blowing so bad my face felt like the pictures you see of the astronauts in the centrifuge.
-Philip
Vortex shedding?
Hi Phillip, I believe we met last April in front of the Mission SB? I had the Nikon.
Hi Phillip, I believe we met last April in front of the Mission SB? I had the Nikon.
Totally great shot Marc.
I'm surprised you still want to talk to me after my rude comment .
Nice to hear from you . I didn't remember seeing your shots from SB I'll have to find them.
-Philip
If you want to see paradise simply look around and see it.
-Willy Wonka
I'm surprised you still want to talk to me after my rude comment .
Nice to hear from you . I didn't remember seeing your shots from SB I'll have to find them.
-Philip
Your remark (& my response) was one of the 12 more cool memorable moments of the print workshop. I was a bit disappointed you didn't show at the marina earlier or hang out longer.
I'm not sure if I posted more than one or two- I'll put everything together later in the week so you don't have to dig.
It sure is beautiful down there.
Anybody can do it.
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
clip and then, only then, I understood the size of the tree.
(Yes, it is the other one)
In this very picture I can see and feel that it must me rather large.
Well... rather large:D But what is rather large
How big is a person near the rock ?
This - can I say it is a problem ? - "problem" is common to many pictures of your beautiful landscape pictures.
Is it intentional ?
I understand that the introduction of scale in pictures as grand as these is very, very difficult.
D
Antonio,
I like to leave scale a mystery often. Although sometimes I am simply composing a shot based on my instant reaction to one element, as in the case of this image. I was so struck by the tree cradling the rock that I simply cared only about two things. First, setting up the tripod in 50 knot winds and second capturing the rapidly vanishing light on the scene.
I agree with you, that scale can be attractive or telling in a landscape. Adding scale to large scenes with people active in the environment made up the majority of what I did while working commercially with advertising agencies. The connection a viewer makes with a image including a person, does not really matter who the person is, becomes welcoming into a place they have most likely never been and this connection is essential
I know this is not the only way to create scale but simply my favorite:ivar
So regarding landscapes with or without scale!
I have discovered through the years, my attention to abstract is stronger than the large grand scene. I do find grandiose landscapes very intriguing, with the perfect painterly light of course but what intrigues me even more is creating images with just enough information as to intrigue the viewer to look further. The trick is to not loose them in doing so.
Marc. Good morning.:D
Thank you for the lines you dropped.
I the pictures you posted.
They have scale and size. I do like that.
However, the last one for example, is one of those photos where the human figure is/was not necessary.
The water, the pebbles, the vegetation are good enough to give a scale.
The other two pictures I really don't know if the human figure adds scale. Huuummm... in the first one yes. But in the second ...
I do agree that large, grand as you Americans say, panoramas without humans are very intriguing and powerful.
In Portugal we can't find such scenarios ...
I am very sorry :cry I can't meet you all next year and argue a little about all this matter and learn with the others and yourself.
I do agree that large, grand as you Americans say, panoramas without humans are very intriguing and powerful.
In Portugal we can't find such scenarios ...
I am very sorry :cry I can't meet you all next year and argue a little about all this matter and learn with the others and yourself.
thumb
There must be some location up in the Sarra da Lousa Mountains where the elements all fall into place
I too wish you could make it to Utah, as I know you would find some scale
here is one i shot with scale check 2 local women sitting in bottom of the frame like dots.
Awais,
Please feel free to add images to your posts in this thread
I see them but wish they were a bit more visible. However, the focal length of the lens you used adds depth as well. This looks like a very dramatic location. The interesting factor of scale is that by using a telephoto lens, scale is distorted to alter what is in the distance by making it appear larger than it really is compared to the subject closer to the camera. This is in my opinion an embellishment, one which I have used many times to enhance the size differential between the FG and the BG.
This image would not have been nearly as effective had I not used a 300mm on a 6x7, which is about 150mm on 35mm format.
The interesting factor of scale is that by using a telephoto lens, scale is distorted to alter what is in the distance by making it appear larger than it really is compared to the subject closer to the camera.
This really made me stop to think. Does using a longer focal length "squish the depth" in photos? I'm trying to grasp the theory and apply it to what you show in practice with the kayak image.
This really made me stop to think. Does using a longer focal length "squish the depth" in photos? I'm trying to grasp the theory and apply it to what you show in practice with the kayak image.
Long telephoto lenses tend to "allow" a vantage point that exaggerates "perspective compression, or the apparent compression of distance.
This really made me stop to think. Does using a longer focal length "squish the depth" in photos? I'm trying to grasp the theory and apply it to what you show in practice with the kayak image.
Yes, if we are considering "squish" to mean appear closer than reality. Ziggy has the perfect true description, thanks Ziggy
Here's one where I tried to "squish" the 50-60 feet between the tree, building remains and rock formation in the background using a focal length of 180mm (270mm 35 mm film).
Marc, do you ever adjust ISO when doing 2 expo HDR shots? at this time of day do you use ISO100?
im having a real hard time blending the two expos with grad tool, do i just need more practice or am i shooting expos with to many fstops apart?
example:
Aaron Nelson
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
Marc, do you ever adjust ISO when doing 2 expo HDR shots? at this time of day do you use ISO100?
im having a real hard time blending the two expos with grad tool, do i just need more practice or am i shooting expos with to many fstops apart?
If I am manually blending two exposures I typically shoot one for the highlights, in this case the sun, and than open up the shutter speed 3 stops. However, I usually darken the shadow exposure quite a bit so it does not look too bright or fake. The key is to make the mask hard between the two exposures, like the horizon in your image, and then use a large soft brush at low opacity "30" to blend the two exposures. Also, you can use the "refine edges tool" in the select menu. The refine edges will essentially do the same thing but automagically:ivar The sliders need some practice to understand.
I dont change the ISO from 200 unless I need a longer exposure for water or something.
You get the award for the worlds largest SUN STARthumb
thanks, and btw the sun star made this merge very difficult for me, though the problems in PP was everytime i got near the horizon line with 30 soft brush or 15, it wouldnt look very real...so i ended up with accepting this shot as it is. i want to better this technique and re-visit this shot some time (that is whenever i find some extra time and im not just spinning my wheels). im getting tired of spinning my wheels, so whens your next workshop to fine tune shots like these using automagically type mysteries and hdr merge techniques?:D
ha, btw the huge sun star was my way of thinking "outside the box" in a contest over in the contest forum last month...
you see, theres this guy i know that has me totally addicted to sun stars, he is the cause to this sun star madness...:D
anyway, that shot is a crop ofcourse, i wish i could print it big, but cannot as you know without the resolution issues...:cry
thanks again for your time Marc,
see you on the beach in November,
A
Aaron Nelson
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
edited September 21, 2008
Aaron,
The manual blending does take time to master, and some images just take much longer. You are correct about this one as the sun rays will cause some additional time in the blend technique. This may help, 1. use the "quick select" tool for highlights, everything above the horizon. 2. blend the two exposures. 3. use the large gradated brush to gradated the diff between the two exposures until visually acceptable.
The hard line between the blends created by the quick select tool is essential. Then it is just a matter of visualizing the changes of luminosity between the two exposures. Some times I must lower the opacity of the brush to 10%
The print workshop is the best workshop right now for learning the masking skills. However, we might just have to visit the idea of having a two day MASKING WORKSHOP! We will through these ideas around at the open house also I am looking forward to seeing you again and dont forget to bring some extra dry shoes
Silves, Algarve - Portugal
Last week end we drove to the south of Portugal to meet someone who would drive us in the wilderness of the mountains of Silves, Algarve.
We got up early in the morning because we were supposed to see animals like dears, wilde pigs, birds and others, inside a hunting reserve.
I was going to hunt animals but with my camera and lenses:D
Some landscapes were also expected to be found.
This week end is now - for me - a start point to crop my pictures differently.
Until now, I always cropped my pictures with a standard size, but - looking at the landscapes themselves - I quickly came to the conclusion that I could not keep a certain size - whichever it was - and make nice and beautiful framed pictures.
I post here the "original" picture. The one where I have not applied any "treatment" and the one I have cropped and "treat" or worked on.
I would like to read some opinions about this picture. I thank you for that.
1. 2.
However, I want to give up to temptation and I post one which I see as one of the best.
Shot early in the morning with the 20D + 70-200 at 200mm. I was looking for that smash - or whatever you want to call it - tele-lens effect. 200*1,6 = 320 mm. I could do better with the multiplier but ...
The use of this lens - I was cradling the 5D and the 20D on my lap all the time - made me look under a different perspective at the landscape.
I am not going to bother you with more pictures I shot but I was very happy with the results.
Was I right ?
The scale in these pictures are the trees which can be seen far, far away. Lightroom work. I like this prog !
The wind was blowing about 50 knots and the light was creeping up the hill fast. I took the image when there was just a bit of sun sticking the wood, most of the sun was below the horizon though. This is what created the glow, which I embellished a tad in PS.
ok, your shooting in these conditions and getting great results makes me wonder...
did you physically hold your tripod down putting pressure on it? or using the tripod with the lenses IS "on" help any? teacher, enlighten me... when i come across 50knot winds what do i do to insure sharpness....? (and on loose rock no less...)
Aaron Nelson
0
Options
Marc MuenchRegistered UsersPosts: 1,420Major grins
I post here the "original" picture. The one where I have not applied any "treatment" and the one I have cropped and "treat" or worked on.
I would like to read some opinions about this picture. I thank you for that.
1. 2.
However, I want to give up to temptation and I post one which I see as one of the best.
Shot early in the morning with the 20D + 70-200 at 200mm. I was looking for that smash - or whatever you want to call it - tele-lens effect. 200*1,6 = 320 mm. I could do better with the multiplier but ...
The use of this lens - I was cradling the 5D and the 20D on my lap all the time - made me look under a different perspective at the landscape.
I am not going to bother you with more pictures I shot but I was very happy with the results.
Was I right ?
The scale in these pictures are the trees which can be seen far, far away. Lightroom work. I like this prog !
The "SMASH"
I like-a your description!
Yes you do have an eye. This is the best one of the lot. However, the depth is created, not only by the bushes on the closest slope but the light as well. Notice how much more contrast is in this one than the others. Also the silhouette snarled dead tree is in the perfect spot, giving notice to it like no others in the image
This is the technique I attempt to use with people. I do think your crop is helping as well.
Why would you limit yourself to standards like 2 x 3 or 3 x 4 when you could crop any image any way you like? just go for it
The "SMASH" I like-a your description! Yes you do have an eye. This is the best one of the lot. However, the depth is created, not only by the bushes on the closest slope but the light as well. Notice how much more contrast is in this one than the others. Also the silhouette snarled dead tree is in the perfect spot, giving notice to it like no others in the image
This is the technique I attempt to use with people. I do think your crop is helping as well. Why would you limit yourself to standards like 2 x 3 or 3 x 4 when you could crop any image any way you like? just go for it
ok, your shooting in these conditions and getting great results makes me wonder...
did you physically hold your tripod down putting pressure on it? or using the tripod with the lenses IS "on" help any? teacher, enlighten me... when i come across 50knot winds what do i do to insure sharpness....? (and on loose rock no less...)
The trick is to stand between the wind and the tripod/camera, but you still must wait between gusts, till the wind is down to around 30k. I think I have spent a quarter of my life waiting for breaks in wind gusts I do spread the legs out to the second notch on the collar or a bit wider than the first notch allows.
The trick is to stand between the wind and the tripod/camera, but you still must wait between gusts, till the wind is down to around 30k. I think I have spent a quarter of my life waiting for breaks in wind gusts I do spread the legs out to the second notch on the collar or a bit wider than the first notch allows.
Boo hoo! I've spent a *third* of my life waiting to get out of work just to have the opportunity to go out shooting and wait for the wind to die down between shots
[Note: Numbers and statistics in the above paragraph may have been exaggerated for illustrative purposes]
Comments
so how long has that rock been suspended?:D
question: the light on the wood,..is that diffused by a cloud?
or is this just timed right after the shade line hits you, or whats the story?
how are you getting that warm glow?
Now my real question: is this a case of you using fill flash to illuminate the wood or is this advanced curves adjustment layers at play?
Photos that don't suck / 365 / Film & Lomography
The wind was blowing about 50 knots and the light was creeping up the hill fast. I took the image when there was just a bit of sun sticking the wood, most of the sun was below the horizon though. This is what created the glow, which I embellished a tad in PS.
When I turned to walk higher up the hill a stronger gust struck and I was stopped dead in my tracks, any harder and I would still be up there plastered to the side of some Bristlecone stump
Phil near the top clutching his tripod:D
notice the speed ripple on his cheek
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
With the need to sprint up 200 meters of scree to catch that last 2 minutes of light, and with there only being 2 or 3 chunks of wood on that ridge, I'd have to imagine it's a 50/50 chance of being the same one.
I saw the little clip and then, only then, I understood the size of the tree.
(Yes, it is the other one)
In this very picture I can see and feel that it must me rather large.
Well... rather large:D But what is rather large
How big is a person near the rock ?
This - can I say it is a problem ? - "problem" is common to many pictures of your beautiful landscape pictures.
Is it intentional ?
I understand that the introduction of scale in pictures as grand as these is very, very difficult.
-Philip
-Willy Wonka
Vortex shedding?
Hi Phillip, I believe we met last April in front of the Mission SB? I had the Nikon.
Totally great shot Marc.
I'm surprised you still want to talk to me after my rude comment
Nice to hear from you
-Philip
-Willy Wonka
Your remark (& my response) was one of the 12 more cool memorable moments of the print workshop. I was a bit disappointed you didn't show at the marina earlier or hang out longer.
I'm not sure if I posted more than one or two- I'll put everything together later in the week so you don't have to dig.
It sure is beautiful down there.
I like to leave scale a mystery often. Although sometimes I am simply composing a shot based on my instant reaction to one element, as in the case of this image. I was so struck by the tree cradling the rock that I simply cared only about two things. First, setting up the tripod in 50 knot winds and second capturing the rapidly vanishing light on the scene.
I agree with you, that scale can be attractive or telling in a landscape. Adding scale to large scenes with people active in the environment made up the majority of what I did while working commercially with advertising agencies. The connection a viewer makes with a image including a person, does not really matter who the person is, becomes welcoming into a place they have most likely never been and this connection is essential
I know this is not the only way to create scale but simply my favorite:ivar
So regarding landscapes with or without scale!
I have discovered through the years, my attention to abstract is stronger than the large grand scene. I do find grandiose landscapes very intriguing, with the perfect painterly light of course
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Thank you for the lines you dropped.
I
They have scale and size. I do like that.
However, the last one for example, is one of those photos where the human figure is/was not necessary.
The water, the pebbles, the vegetation are good enough to give a scale.
The other two pictures I really don't know if the human figure adds scale. Huuummm... in the first one yes. But in the second ...
I do agree that large, grand as you Americans say, panoramas without humans are very intriguing and powerful.
In Portugal we can't find such scenarios ...
I am very sorry :cry I can't meet you all next year and argue a little about all this matter and learn with the others and yourself.
here is one i shot with scale check 2 local women sitting in bottom of the frame like dots.
My Gallery
There must be some location up in the Sarra da Lousa Mountains where the elements all fall into place
I too wish you could make it to Utah, as I know you would find some scale
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Please feel free to add images to your posts in this thread
I see them but wish they were a bit more visible. However, the focal length of the lens you used adds depth as well. This looks like a very dramatic location. The interesting factor of scale is that by using a telephoto lens, scale is distorted to alter what is in the distance by making it appear larger than it really is compared to the subject closer to the camera. This is in my opinion an embellishment, one which I have used many times to enhance the size differential between the FG and the BG.
This image would not have been nearly as effective had I not used a 300mm on a 6x7, which is about 150mm on 35mm format.
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
This really made me stop to think. Does using a longer focal length "squish the depth" in photos? I'm trying to grasp the theory and apply it to what you show in practice with the kayak image.
Long telephoto lenses tend to "allow" a vantage point that exaggerates "perspective compression, or the apparent compression of distance.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Yes, if we are considering "squish" to mean appear closer than reality. Ziggy has the perfect true description, thanks Ziggy
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Here's one where I tried to "squish" the 50-60 feet between the tree, building remains and rock formation in the background using a focal length of 180mm (270mm 35 mm film).
http://aeve.com/1tpf/1-post-lvm/455-cbw5743.jpg
Marc, do you ever adjust ISO when doing 2 expo HDR shots? at this time of day do you use ISO100?
im having a real hard time blending the two expos with grad tool, do i just need more practice or am i shooting expos with to many fstops apart?
example:
If I am manually blending two exposures I typically shoot one for the highlights, in this case the sun, and than open up the shutter speed 3 stops. However, I usually darken the shadow exposure quite a bit so it does not look too bright or fake. The key is to make the mask hard between the two exposures, like the horizon in your image, and then use a large soft brush at low opacity "30" to blend the two exposures. Also, you can use the "refine edges tool" in the select menu. The refine edges will essentially do the same thing but automagically:ivar The sliders need some practice to understand.
I dont change the ISO from 200 unless I need a longer exposure for water or something.
You get the award for the worlds largest SUN STAR
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
ha, btw the huge sun star was my way of thinking "outside the box" in a contest over in the contest forum last month...
you see, theres this guy i know that has me totally addicted to sun stars, he is the cause to this sun star madness...:D
anyway, that shot is a crop ofcourse, i wish i could print it big, but cannot as you know without the resolution issues...:cry
thanks again for your time Marc,
see you on the beach in November,
A
The manual blending does take time to master, and some images just take much longer. You are correct about this one as the sun rays will cause some additional time in the blend technique. This may help, 1. use the "quick select" tool for highlights, everything above the horizon. 2. blend the two exposures. 3. use the large gradated brush to gradated the diff between the two exposures until visually acceptable.
The hard line between the blends created by the quick select tool is essential. Then it is just a matter of visualizing the changes of luminosity between the two exposures. Some times I must lower the opacity of the brush to 10%
The print workshop is the best workshop right now for learning the masking skills. However, we might just have to visit the idea of having a two day MASKING WORKSHOP! We will through these ideas around at the open house also
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Last week end we drove to the south of Portugal to meet someone who would drive us in the wilderness of the mountains of Silves, Algarve.
We got up early in the morning because we were supposed to see animals like dears, wilde pigs, birds and others, inside a hunting reserve.
I was going to hunt animals but with my camera and lenses:D
Some landscapes were also expected to be found.
This week end is now - for me - a start point to crop my pictures differently.
Until now, I always cropped my pictures with a standard size, but - looking at the landscapes themselves - I quickly came to the conclusion that I could not keep a certain size - whichever it was - and make nice and beautiful framed pictures.
I post here the "original" picture. The one where I have not applied any "treatment" and the one I have cropped and "treat" or worked on.
I would like to read some opinions about this picture. I thank you for that.
However, I want to give up to temptation and I post one which I see as one of the best.
Shot early in the morning with the 20D + 70-200 at 200mm. I was looking for that smash - or whatever you want to call it - tele-lens effect. 200*1,6 = 320 mm. I could do better with the multiplier but ...
The use of this lens - I was cradling the 5D and the 20D on my lap all the time - made me look under a different perspective at the landscape.
I am not going to bother you with more pictures I shot but I was very happy with the results.
Was I right ?
The scale in these pictures are the trees which can be seen far, far away. Lightroom work. I like this prog !
ok, your shooting in these conditions and getting great results makes me wonder...
did you physically hold your tripod down putting pressure on it? or using the tripod with the lenses IS "on" help any? teacher, enlighten me... when i come across 50knot winds what do i do to insure sharpness....? (and on loose rock no less...)
The "SMASH"
I like-a your description!
Yes you do have an eye. This is the best one of the lot. However, the depth is created, not only by the bushes on the closest slope but the light as well. Notice how much more contrast is in this one than the others. Also the silhouette snarled dead tree is in the perfect spot, giving notice to it like no others in the image
This is the technique I attempt to use with people. I do think your crop is helping as well.
Why would you limit yourself to standards like 2 x 3 or 3 x 4 when you could crop any image any way you like? just go for it
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
The trick is to stand between the wind and the tripod/camera, but you still must wait between gusts, till the wind is down to around 30k. I think I have spent a quarter of my life waiting for breaks in wind gusts
Muench Workshops
MW on Facebook
Boo hoo! I've spent a *third* of my life waiting to get out of work just to have the opportunity to go out shooting and wait for the wind to die down between shots
[Note: Numbers and statistics in the above paragraph may have been exaggerated for illustrative purposes]
Photo Gallery | Blog | I'm Unemployed!