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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda, JimFox
Username   Password

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines
  

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
  

Sw Grand Vista
  
 
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sw Grand Vista


Taken during my "Chasing SW Moonsoon Light" workshop. I carefully kept an eye on various satellites and weather reports and we took off to this special location just in time to have thunderstorms rolling near by and in our scene at sunset. This is my second version of the shot where I kept the lightening in. This is now one of my favorite places to take people. Even camp out!

Feel Free to Facebook me if you so choose.

Thank you very much for looking.

*As always, most accurately viewed on a correctly calibrated desktop monitor, using Safari, Chrome or Firefox (color managed browsers).





Slight revision 2. Saturation down 5 pts in PS Layer Color Mode, the mid tones dropped a hair to relieve a little selective highlight glow, and a slight dodge on the back left mountain as Justin suggested.



Edited on Apr 08, 2014 at 07:22 PM · View previous versions



Apr 07, 2014 at 07:03 PM
CheechzeppLn
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sw Grand Vista


Everything and the kitchen sink.... well done and thanks for sharing.

Charlie



Apr 07, 2014 at 07:18 PM
mike717
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sw Grand Vista


I can see why this might be a favorite place Mark. Wonderful image though I have to admit I don't see the kitchen sink that Charlie says is there.

Mike



Apr 07, 2014 at 07:49 PM
Kee Woo Rhee
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sw Grand Vista


Mark,

I am rather puzzled by this photo from Coal Mine Canyon.
This image was posted sometime ago, maybe two years ago.
Are they the same images? Just a lightning is missing from last posting.
Nontheless, wonderful photo w or w/o kitchen sink!

Kee



Apr 07, 2014 at 08:00 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sw Grand Vista


Kee Woo Rhee wrote:
Mark,

I am rather puzzled by this photo from Coal Mine Canyon.
This image was posted sometime ago, maybe two years ago.
Are they the same images? Just a lightning is missing from last posting.
Nontheless, wonderful photo w or w/o kitchen sink!

Kee



Hi Kee. Thank you for the compliment.

I shot the specific composition continuously for hundreds of frames back to back in rapid fire succession to capture a handful of strikes (often people do that for multi strikes in an image). Then in a blend mode allowed the lightening to come through in this image. That is how I originally processed this. Then my wife at the time thought it might be a little "over the top." So, I put it away and processed a second version without the strike. Recently going through that folder again I saw the original and thought it looked good so I made a few tweaks to it and there you have it.



Edited on Apr 07, 2014 at 08:41 PM · View previous versions



Apr 07, 2014 at 08:39 PM
Nigel Turner
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sw Grand Vista


I've been to this location a fair few times over the years and I feel that your composition is spot on Mark. However I feel that the image is a bit overcooked with to much saturation and Photoshop trickery. The sky for example just doesn't look natural.

The sun is still far from setting is as evident from the shadows in the lower left corner of the frame, but the sky looks much more 'sunset' in its color. I would expect the color in the sky to be more neutral and a deep kind or grey.

Of course those viewing the image that haven't been there will see it through your interpretation and presentation, but I feel this isn't a true representation of the landscape.. or nature's light.

Still a nice image though.




Apr 07, 2014 at 08:41 PM
Kee Woo Rhee
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sw Grand Vista


Mark Metternich wrote:
Hi Kee. Thank you for the compliment.

I shot the specific composition continuously for hundreds of frames back to back in rapid fire succession to capture a handful of strikes (often people do that for multi strikes in an image). Then in a blend mode allowed the lightening to come through in this image. That is how I originally processed this. Then my wife at the time thought it might be a little "over the top." So, I put it away and processed a second version without the strike. Recently going through that folder again I saw the original and
...Show more


Ah, that was what happened! Thanks for your explanation. This image and the one you posted, horizontal one.. are just fabulous images that I keep in my brain. Great!



Apr 07, 2014 at 08:52 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sw Grand Vista


Nigel Turner wrote:
I've been to this location a fair few times over the years and I feel that your composition is spot on Mark. However I feel that the image is a bit overcooked with to much saturation and Photoshop trickery. The sky for example just doesn't look natural.

The sun is still far from setting is as evident from the shadows in the lower left corner of the frame, but the sky looks much more 'sunset' in its color. I would expect the color in the sky to be more neutral and a deep kind or grey.

Of course those viewing
...Show more

Thanks Nigel.

I get what you are saying. The way I see it, we need to be true to ourselves. Anyone who knows me knows I have never been and never will be a literalist/purist! I see photography as art (and if it wasn't I would not do it). So, I wont argue how perfectly literal this is. That also goes for all my favorite photographers and friends who inspire my own work. People like Adamus, Ryan Dyar, Alex Noriega, Chip Phillips, Myles Morgan, Kah Kit, Ted Gore, Chris Moore many others... So, I am at peace with saying this is not "perfect reality." I am also OK if some don't like my style or rendering of a specific image (although I do appreciate and love to grow from critical feedback) or all of them for that matter. We all have very different tastes.



Apr 07, 2014 at 08:59 PM
panoramer
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sw Grand Vista


unbelievable detail.


Apr 07, 2014 at 09:16 PM
Derek Weston
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sw Grand Vista


Awesome composition. I remember you posting that location a while back and it really stood out to me.

Processing seems a little odd, sort of a glow around the rocks, little too much contrast. (I don't know if it's an HDR thing or what)



Apr 07, 2014 at 09:39 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Nigel Turner
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sw Grand Vista


Hi Mark,

I understand what you are saying and I feel that that is where photographers and photography differs nowadays as it seems there is a wide gulf between us.

There are the more 'purist' photographers who manage to capture the light, as is on the 'very rare occasion' when its at it's absolute best and those that 'manufacture' it out of nowhere. I spend on average 20 weeks a year in the field, and have done so for the last 20 years and I can say that I rarely see anything like the dramatic skies and lighting conditions that are so prevalent in todays digitally manufactured images.

Today's images by those that you mention are a collection of images that have been successfully merged into one in my humble opinion and experience. I have certainly never experienced lighting conditions as they render them. Rarely have I have ever seen such lighting captured on film from my peers before the advent of digital capture.

That really should tell you something here.

Funnily enough today a post by Marc Adamus reappeared from Patagonia. Is that the real light that Mark saw? I'll bet my last Dollar that nobody ever gets to see the RAW files that Mark has. No disrespect is meant to Mark here, because he is a jolly good photographer and one of the new generation of landscape photographers who I greatly admire.

But notice I use the term 'New Generation'.. and this is where I differ.

I feel.. and this is purely my opinion, that most of those that you listed would have struggled to make careers as landscape photographers before digital came to the fore. I'd love to see them humping large format cameras into the back of beyond for starters. To get the type of light that many of them seem to capture on a regular basis, over a relatively short space of time would have taken a lifetime, if it ever happened at all. The light that many of them 'exhibit' in their images was just not there on a regular basis.

How would they fair nowadays if Photoshop wasn't available?

Of course I know technology has shifted with the times, and photography has reached the point of where most people are now capable of capturing a decent image.

But my question is this: Should photographers who have a fantastic ability to get the most out of a piece of software also be considered 'Master' landscape photographers?

I know full well that the difference between digital and film capture is night and day, but when I was making images before digital I had to deal with the hand that was dealt me with regards the light. Nowadays as is shown, if I wanted to I could manufacture any lighting condition that takes my fancy.

At the end of my life.. what would I choose? To be remembered as a good photographer or a 'master' of software?

I personally choose not to manufacture my images, but then again I'm probably in the minority. Each to their own I guess.

Again, just my thoughts.
Nigel.



Apr 07, 2014 at 10:04 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sw Grand Vista


Mark, I really like the composition but am having a hard time liking the image. My feeling is the post processing is too heavy handed here giving an HDR appearance to the image. If that is what you were after, then I guess you succeeded, but just not to my liking.

You wouldn't have a version which portrays the scene in a more natural way. I'd love to see it with less overall contrast and less saturation just to see as a comparison.

Harry



Apr 07, 2014 at 11:38 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sw Grand Vista


Mark Metternich wrote:
Thanks Nigel.

I get what you are saying. The way I see it, we need to be true to ourselves. Anyone who knows me knows I have never been and never will be a literalist/purist! I see photography as art (and if it wasn't I would not do it). So, I wont argue how perfectly literal this is. That also goes for all my favorite photographers and friends who inspire my own work. People like Adamus, Ryan Dyar, Alex Noriega, Chip Phillips, Myles Morgan, Kah Kit, Ted Gore, Chris Moore many others... So, I am at peace with saying
...Show more

I agree that there is a room for a wide range of interpretations of the landscape. Certainly against the backdrop of landscape painting, what we do with photographs seems generally less "liberal" with the true nature of the subject.

One tricky thing with landscape photography is the baggage of "realism" that photography carries with it. Photographers understand that "all photographs lie," and that a photograph is always an interpretation on some level. Yet...viewers who have not seen this place or places like it may imagine, because they are looking at the ostensibly "truthful" photographic representation, that they simply have not been lucky enough to see a landscape that looks like this one looks, and that the photographer somehow is able to seek out and locate real scenes and events that are there but which are so special that no one else ever experiences them. Indeed, this is a spectacular place. But, as well, those who see the photograph could go there on the same days when you were there to make your exposures... and they would not see a scene that looks like what you have created through your extensive post-processing.

I'm not offering an opinion about whether this is a good, bad, or indifferent thing... but I do think that it is important to confront the relationship between what viewers may think the photograph is presenting to them and what the photograph actually represents... and perhaps also our own role in encouraging certain assumptions about photographs and what they show us.

Also, a bit of caution about attributing ways of seeing to membership in a "generation" is in order. Consider two of my favorite "classic" black and white photographers, Adams and Uelsmann. Both are certainly not of a "new" generation, but both used processes to manipulate their images in post-production (albeit optical/chemical post!) that were at least as extensive as those used today. Also, take a look at the wildly diverse work of Huntington Witherell, which ranges to "old school" classic "west coast landscape" black and white photography to wildly imaginative color manipulations of flora subjects that morph into imaginary landscapes. The old is new and often the new is old.

(For my part, I'm quite comfortable with photographic processes that go much further with the manipulation of images than you or the others you mention tend to go. The tricky thing for me about some landscape work that does this is that it can either claim or allow the viewer to assume that the image represents a reality about the landscape when it actually does not. Highly abstract landscape photographs that say "this is not how it looked and you shouldn't think it is" (a la Uelsmann) are one thing, while similar images that allow or encourage the unaware viewer to imagine that things actually look this way are another.)

Take care,

Dan

(For reference, folks can google "coal mine canyon")


Edited on Apr 08, 2014 at 05:03 AM · View previous versions



Apr 07, 2014 at 11:46 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sw Grand Vista


Nigel Turner wrote:
Hi Mark,

I understand what you are saying and I feel that that is where photographers and photography differs nowadays as it seems there is a wide gulf between us.

There are the more 'purist' photographers who manage to capture the light, as is on the 'very rare occasion' when its at it's absolute best and those that 'manufacture' it out of nowhere. I spend on average 20 weeks a year in the field, and have done so for the last 20 years and I can say that I rarely see anything like the dramatic skies and lighting conditions that are
...Show more

I get you.

But this is a really old and totally beat to death discussion and I dont think here is the place to do that all over again. What is "real"? What did Ansel do? What is documentary realism? Is photography art? Where should people go with art...

Photography will march on like it always has and the boundaries will always be pushed. I am the direct opposite. I love the great new work the new and newest generation is producing and I plan on always embracing the current standard of my art form. But totally manufactured images? Those don't (usually) appeal to me as much. But creatively optimized images do. I also don't agree that the newer folks like Adamus... could not do outstanding work with Jurassic equipment, mentality and techniques in the older standard of time. The people who excel in this world are always the talented who also combine that with incredible work ethic and creativity. The pioneers always will get flack. That is how it always has been.

Then back to my work: I never have the disclaimer saying "this is documentary photo ultra realism." As I said before, if I was constrained by some "rules" of what tools I could use, or how I could use them, or traditionalism I would walk away from photography gladly and pick up another form of art!

BTW, many don't know it but my other career is a musician /guitarist. I play "New Flamenco." My favorite artist on earth is Ottmar Liebert. He pioneered the genera "New Flamenco." Before him there was traditional Flamenco (no hooks, repeating melodies, choruses, easy listen grooves...). Flamenco was (and true Flamenco is) a percussive rhythmic, flashy style of playing guitar for a dancer to dance to. Ottmar came from a pop/rock background and took the techniques and combined them with the easy listening style. "New Flamenco" was born - much to the incredible scorn of many in the old traditional camp.

I see this whole thing in much the same way. As old as I will ever get I don't ever want to get set in my ways. That is why I carefully watch and study what the new generation is doing. I am 46 and most of the people I shoot with are in their 20's! To me I look at an image and I either have an emotional connection to it or I dont and I could care a less what the person has done to get it to look as it does. It is art to me.



Apr 07, 2014 at 11:54 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sw Grand Vista


I did render the image mainly for 500px.com (a white background) and may have converted it for a dark gray background (here) a little sloppily. Here it is a little less saturated and a hair less contrast. It is not a HDR, and yes a touch of highlight glow (diffusion) was used.






Edited on Apr 08, 2014 at 12:29 AM · View previous versions



Apr 08, 2014 at 12:00 AM
lookoutscout
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sw Grand Vista


Great discussion by all. Absolutely love the image Mark and admire your work.
Dave



Apr 08, 2014 at 12:28 AM
Nigel Turner
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Sw Grand Vista


As I said Mark.. its each to his/her own.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with your image if that is the way you wish to show it. I'm just saying that it doesn't represent reality.

In my eyes photography really should represent reality, because all other art forms are a figment of the artists imagination. As they say.. the camera doesn't lie (normally) and taken literally. Unfortunately nowadays the camera does lie, and does it far more than I'd like to see.

For those who want to invent light and composition normally become painters, for those of us who aren't that good become photographers, and those of us that aren't that good at photography use Photoshop.



Apr 08, 2014 at 12:29 AM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Sw Grand Vista


Nigel Turner wrote:
As I said Mark.. its each to his/her own.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with your image if that is the way you wish to show it. I'm just saying that it doesn't represent reality.

In my eyes photography really should represent reality, because all other art forms are a figment of the artists imagination. As they say.. the camera doesn't lie (normally) and taken literally. Unfortunately nowadays the camera does lie, and does it far more than I'd like to see.

For those who want to invent light and composition normally become painters, for those of us who aren't that
...Show more


Sorry, Nigel but I could not agree less with a lot of what you said. Apparently, we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. And I am fine with that. Most of my best friends don't think anywhere like I do on many important issues of life (faith, politics...). But we can still be great friends.

Hopefully this thread does not degenerate into a big argument about what photography should be. Maybe someone can start another general discussion on one of the forums about what photography is or should be allowed to be? I have participated in that argument/discussion so many times over the last 12 years I may or may not have a contribution. But as you know, I'm in the camp that it was never "real" to begin with and that "documentary photo ultra realism" is often quite boring. If you have looked at the galleries of the artists I described above, then you will know the general kind of work I usually esteem (give or take some things).



Apr 08, 2014 at 12:41 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Sw Grand Vista


Nigel Turner wrote:
As I said Mark.. its each to his/her own.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with your image if that is the way you wish to show it. I'm just saying that it doesn't represent reality.

In my eyes photography really should represent reality, because all other art forms are a figment of the artists imagination. As they say.. the camera doesn't lie (normally) and taken literally. Unfortunately nowadays the camera does lie, and does it far more than I'd like to see.

For those who want to invent light and composition normally become painters, for those of us who aren't that
...Show more

Here you and I part company. I can think of no reason to assume that "photography should represent reality." That is a very low standard for art. Photography can and should, at least when it comes to fine art photography, share the photographer's way of seeing and perhaps also have an honesty and integrity of representation at its core.

You write as if "imagination" is not a good thing! Great photography of any sort (landscape, street, still life, abstract constructions, portrait, etc.) embodies imagination as a core attribute.

The camera does not lie "nowadays." The camera always lies and always has lied. This is a fundamental truth about photographs. While they may appear to be "real," every single photograph is a manipulation and distortion of reality in many important ways: what was included and what was left out? in what direction was the camera pointed? what was the effect of choosing a particular moment to capture the initial image? what does it mean that the photograph can not include non-visual parts of the experience of the original subject?

By the way, I'm not especially interested in what photography should be, but I am very interested in better understanding what photography isquite a different subject.

Dan



Apr 08, 2014 at 12:51 AM
Nigel Turner
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Sw Grand Vista


Hi Dan.

I appreciate your input to this discussion and your views on this particular thread.

But I choose what to include or exclude in my frame. I also choose what to leave out. That gives me the control in photographic terms.

But to be honest your reasoning is well beyond my learning. Words for words as the learned use on us, the less educated to try to make one look better.

In other words Dan.. straight forward English would have sufficed.

Why don't you just say what you think in easily read terms.

Regards,
Nigel.




Apr 08, 2014 at 01:21 AM
1
       2       3       4       end




FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password