Franconia Ridge Pic

[--M.]

Yeah, it's good. But...

1. Is this the effect of using "raw" data?

2. I love it, it's got talent. But it seems cut in two: sky, and ridge.

3. And looking for people against the whole is asking for a whole different view. And then, I thought: What if you were seeing this in the MFA as a large-format print against the wall? Then, the people would come out as an easter-egg treasure. One would have the two views: one from across the room, one when reading the inscription card close up. They'd then look again at the photo and see the people. It would be almost like a Rembrandt that way.

4. I agree that the floor crop is a little too severe.

5. Your use of b&w/sepia allows for all the texture you're (presumeably) looking for with the sky. It also makes the ridge look like a moonscape -- which may not be your intent.

It's a nice piece, but you'll accomplish all these aims in another shot; this one is close, but not quite there. But then, who am I to judge? You do good stuff.

Just my two cents,

--M.

 

[forestgnome]

With all due respect to posters who provided requested critiques, I find the composition in the first image to be impeccable. I wouldn't suggest any manipulation of your original vision. The composition is what you wanted to share, so it's pointless to change it. I happen to like the way the line of the ridge moves toward the center on a nice angle. The peak at mid-depth (MT Liberty?) is a nice point of interest between the ridge line and the dramatic clouds. The clouds remind me of the paintings of the early artists of the area.

To me the composition is about the whole Earth, the relationship of the atmosphere and the land, and it gives a feeling of expansiveness. I'm standing there dreaming about all the adventures I can have in the forest, all the different places I could explore in all different seasons. I'll stop now.

Nice work!

 

[darren]

Thanks for all the great feedback, I appreciate it.

MJ - you might want to check the gamma settings on your monitor. I checked the image on several monitors and the ridge and mountains in the foreground wasn't too dark on any of them. I can see lots of detail on the ridge. I can see all the bushes, rocks, patches of snow, and the trees on liberty. None of it appears to to overly dark at all. The clouds have a couple of small patches that could be close to being blown out, but overall they aren't blown out at all. That's why I am thinking that your gamma might be set too high. Does anyone else see the ridge as too dark?


el-bagr & everyone else who commented on the bland middle - I agree, the middle of the picture could use a little help from a neutral density filter. It would have to be a "double gradiated" filter that goes from dark to light in both directions, up and down, from the middle. I'll have do some tweaking in photoshop. I know they sell camera filters like that, so I should be able to mimic it somehow with ps.

blueridge - no fee for the background...but I did make the resolution really low so you can't make a free print from it. If you do want a print though, I will have to charge you double since you are a Steelers fan.

i12climbup - you mean this shot? I made an 8x12 print with a lustre finish and it looks great! I really like it. Email me if you want a print.

forestnome - good feedback from a real photo buff makes me happy thanks!

Thanks again for all the comments.

- darren

 

[MichaelJ]

Darren,
It wasn't so much monitor gamma as simply that the brightness of the clouds was in such stark contrast that it actually made it hard for my eyes to focus in on the darker details of the ridge. Like having a bright light too close. When I scrolled the clouds off the top of the screen it was much easier to see.

 

[timmus]

I think it is unbalance because the whites in the sky are too highlighted while the blacks in the ridge are not black enough. I also think there is too much sky.

I just had fun trying some stuff with your pic (nice, BTW) here is what I would do with it. No need to add that it is just my opinion, you are the artist

 

[NYBRAD]

Very nice

Very nice shot. I like the colors just as they are. Just curious, what did the weather do for the next few hours?

 

[Gris]

My $0.02 to yet another great shot - I don't care for artificially colored shots, unless they are either straight B & W (for contrast) or "straight" sephia in an almost faded yellow-brown tint (to make them look old). Everything else looks tricked up to me. That's just my old-school taste.

 

[Puck]

Darren
I looked at the pic. I felt uneasy about it for some reason...I kept looking at it. Then I realized I have been looking at this thing with a feeling of uneasiness for some time now. Meaning I was drawn into it and it didn't let me go. That is a sign of good art.

Your foreground has great resolution, details in the rocks, the trail on the ridge etc. Then after that the resolution is lost. I thought there should be more on the cone peak to balance the haze and tumultuous sky. My eye is drawn into the picture looking for something solid to focus on. This brought up an emotion; when seeing a sky like this that can look angry and I wonder will there be lightning, hail or showers? is there a solid point of safety in the distance? It is all part of the thrill. Your picture reminded me of that feeling.

 

[darren]

As for the weather, a short time after I took this shot, we got chased off the ridge by a lightning storm.

Bad weather can be a great time for photography.

- darren