Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · Impact versus Realism
  
 
Camperjim
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Impact versus Realism


I shot this area several times trying to include the thermal falls in context with the most dramatic skies and lighting I could find. Now I wonder if I overdid it. Does the overall scene have impact or has the impact of the sky detracted from the thermal falls? When it comes to Yellowstone, realism is a relative term, but does this scene appear realistic?

Thanks, Jim





Mammoth, Yellowstone National Park




Sep 24, 2012 at 05:28 AM
AuntiPode
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Impact versus Realism


The light in the distant sky is nice. The light on the falls, un fortunately, isn't.


Sep 24, 2012 at 10:09 AM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Impact versus Realism


The sky looks nice to me as well.
The cranberry red color in the falls does not look believable to me.
Scott



Sep 24, 2012 at 01:30 PM
Bob Jarman
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Impact versus Realism


I must agree with "over did" on the sky. The falls can likely be revived in processing - be an interesting challenge.

Just how cold was it?

Bob



Sep 24, 2012 at 02:12 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Impact versus Realism


I'm good with the realism of the sky ... it can turn all kinds of colors, some more rare than others. The WHITE SNOW in the mountains give a visual clue of realism and believability to the sky that is BEHIND the mountains, yet not illuminating the mountains.

I'm diggin' the neutrality of that which isn't "sunlit", but rather illuminated by the sky (i.e. absence of the blues). Not sure if you went with a global WB that pushed your sky (and maybe the cranberry) or if you selectively separated the two.

As Karen mentioned ... the lighting is very flat at the falls. This is because it is only illuminated by the overhead sky gianormous soft box ... i.e. ultra-low contrast lighting ... without any specularity/contrast available from the sun at this hour.

We are naturally drawn to bright & contrast. The brightest portion of the sky (LHC) is in contrast with the mountain in both tone & hue. As such, it steals the show away from the low contrast values of the the falls (except for the high contrast cranberry).

Bob Jarman wrote:
I must agree with "over did" on the sky.


I'm more inclined to go the route of "under did" the falls (due to the variance in lighting contrast levels).

Took a stab at drawing the eye a bit more toward the falls, hopefully without losing the sky too much. In a rare instance, I actually ADDED some blue to the foreground color balance. Gave it a slight haircut also.

As always, S&P to taste as to how you might want to dial in the pieces of the puzzle regarding balance/weight, but hopefully this shows a shift in focal point toward the falls ... which, imo, is the point of the image.

BTW ... Nice capture. Thanks for the vicarious experience (with a little imagination) to "take me there".










Sep 24, 2012 at 02:27 PM
Camperjim
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Impact versus Realism


Scott, Bob,
The foreground colors are actually pretty accurate. This was shot in July. There is no ice but rather travertine rock intensely colored by bacteria. I am including a closeup of this remarkable feature.

Rusty,
I think your version made some subtle improvements. Thanks

I mentioned shooting this numerous times. I was hoping for a great sunset which never occurred. This image was manufactured by adding a sky from another capture. My first attempt was really poor since the colors in the sky were intensely red and the WB in the rest of the image was cooler with blue mountains. I painted some faint red haze across the mountains and some of the foreground. I probably should have gone back to the original image to shift the foreground and midground WB towards red. After stitching in the sky, making adjustments was difficult.

I rarely do much but simple Photoshop processing so this was just an experiment which turned out to be more difficult than I expected.

Thanks for all the comments.








Sep 24, 2012 at 04:51 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Impact versus Realism


The closeup really helps to reveal what we're dealing with. I had no way of knowing how much the red/cranberry was supposed to be, so I pulled it back more than I should have. Those are really excellent color features involved @ the rock. I suspected they would prove to be a natural aspect ... just didn't have a clue what it would/should be on this one.

Cool.



Sep 24, 2012 at 05:45 PM





FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password