Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

FM Forum Rules
Landscape Posting Guidelines
  

FM Forums | Landscape Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
  

Archive 2014 · Panther Take

  
 
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Panther Take


Trying to get a brand new take on Panther Falls (Columbia river Gorge) I found a way to duct tape my fully extended tripod upside down off a log, camera also upside down, only a few inches off the water using the Canon 14mmL2. With chest waders on I stood in lower/chest deep water and nervously found the composition I wanted. I pulled it off without an insurance claim, so that was good! I took a hand full of shots but got nervous because my camera was getting totally drenched.

Please feel free to give me feedback or critique.

Hope you enjoy.


*Most accurately viewed on a well calibrated desktop monitor, viewing through Chrome, Safari, or Firefox.











Here is a crop someone on another forum suggested, that has gone over well so far there. Curious what you think?



Edited on Apr 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM · View previous versions



Apr 26, 2014 at 09:36 PM
wswartzwel
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Panther Take


Colors and exposure look awesome. Thanks for all the effort you put into capturing such a nice shot.

Add to the list, another use for duct tape.



Apr 26, 2014 at 09:57 PM
PeaktoPeek
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Panther Take


Excellent -- the work to gain this perspective really paid off. Pretty ballsy to pull it off with no insurance. You have cojones of steel, my friend!
Paul



Apr 26, 2014 at 09:59 PM
Evan Baines
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Panther Take


Mark,

Nice shot and a really cool perspective!

Only nit is I find the distortion on the leaves on the left of the frame a bit distracting.



Apr 26, 2014 at 10:06 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Panther Take


Evan Baines wrote:
Mark,

Nice shot and a really cool perspective!

Only nit is I find the distortion on the leaves on the left of the frame a bit distracting.



Thank you.



Apr 26, 2014 at 10:09 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Panther Take


PeaktoPeek wrote:
Excellent -- the work to gain this perspective really paid off. Pretty ballsy to pull it off with no insurance. You have cojones of steel, my friend!
Paul



!

It's my job! I'd never make it if I was timid.



Apr 26, 2014 at 10:10 PM
MikeW
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Panther Take


sweet shot, the distortion is a little distracting. Is that just the 14mm characteristics? It might be because the growth is on an angle too emphasing any distortion.

I like dare devil stuff, would be fun to get up to some mischief sometime soon..*cough* mailing list...*cough*



Apr 27, 2014 at 12:24 AM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Panther Take


MikeW wrote:
sweet shot, the distortion is a little distracting. Is that just the 14mm characteristics? It might be because the growth is on an angle too emphasing any distortion.

I like dare devil stuff, would be fun to get up to some mischief sometime soon..*cough* mailing list...*cough*



Mike that would be awesome!

I warped it a little more to deal with some distracting elements, so no, the Canon 14mm L2 is pretty darn good and SHARP as heck. Not a lot of distortion.

Edited by JimFox on Apr 27, 2014 at 06:06 PM · View previous versions



Apr 27, 2014 at 12:52 AM
JimFox
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Panther Take


Hey Mark,

So if it looks okay on a non-calibrated non-Safari, Chrome or Firefox viewing environment, does that mean the shot is not good? It sounds a bit odd when you, and there are a few others have to say that on every shot they post. I guess at least you aren't posting links to Wide Gamut versions. I think there must be something wrong if every shot has to come with a disclaimer. Does it really stop people from giving suggestions? If I am not in the desired viewing environment, should I not even bother commenting with a suggestion, since clearly any issues would be with my viewing end, and not on the posting end...

Mark, your work is usually very good, so I don't see the need for disclaimers being posted by you. Knowing you, I know you like open dialogue with people, so perhaps that disclaimer isn't really needed? If someone suggests that the colors are not right or are too saturated, you are still going to tell them that they look good on your calibrated Safari system...

Okay, off the soap box...

I like this shot. Perhaps because I have only shot in the Columbia River gorge a half dozen times, I can't say the composition is different from other peoples takes, but I will say that I like it, and it flows nicely. It certainly will look nice hanging in peoples living rooms.

Jim



Apr 27, 2014 at 03:29 AM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Panther Take


JimFox wrote:
Hey Mark,

So if it looks okay on a non-calibrated non-Safari, Chrome or Firefox viewing environment, does that mean the shot is not good? It sounds a bit odd when you, and there are a few others have to say that on every shot they post. I guess at least you aren't posting links to Wide Gamut versions. I think there must be something wrong if every shot has to come with a disclaimer. Does it really stop people from giving suggestions? If I am not in the desired viewing environment, should I not even bother commenting with a suggestion, since
...Show more

I am glad you asked because I enjoy helping educate people about color management!

Because part of my profession is color management consulting and education, I like the disclaimer. And color management may be, in part, my own soap box. I even have an instructional video tutorial coming out on color management in July.

The disclaimer is mainly two things. Slightly educational for those who don't know much/or anything about color management (as an encouragement to look into, and more importantly maybe embrace the matter). And, two: the honest point that if one really wants to see the image and its nuances as close to intended as possible, it gives them that information, describing that standard space. In other words, it lets people know the truth that if they are not calibrated and not on a color managed browser, they will not be able to see the image nearly as close to as intended as they might want.

The described setup in the disclaimer has been the growing standard for photo professionals /serious hobbyists for quite some time now. People, who take their color management seriously. Some forums embrace it more than others. Because monitors are all over the map (in very widely varying, very wrong ways) calibrating them just makes sense. When one of my heroes, Photoshop / color management guru Bruce Fraser talked about the issue he said "...so we need to shoot for the middle of a very wide barn door." I agree. I think people who are serious about the accuracy of their work should also consider taking responsibility to get their setups as correct as possible. Then of course we put the images out into the world and who knows how people will be viewing them! The full array from the more serious photo professional/hobbyist to someone browsing around on an old beat up laptop or CRT display.

So in essence the disclaimer says, if you want to see this as close to intended, then this is how you do that.

As far as critique/feedback goes... No, in no way am I saying "don't critique me" or "I don't want to be critiqued." Nothing could be farther from the truth! I have always loved critique/feedback and have always very much appreciated and benefited from learning from it. In fact I welcome it!

Interestingly, I had dinner with Aaron Feinberg the other night and we realized we had met through Fred Miranda years ago. I used to have another user name, but I have been here maybe nearing 10 years. He has also been on here maybe about that long. When we were taking about it he said "I learned everything I know off of Fred Miranda!" I laughed and said "me too!!!." So, yes, we come here with a teachable spirit, to learn. Critique/feedback is a very big part of that.

But yes there is this aspect too. There is a person on this forum who has been giving me very critical (I mean that in the positive sense) careful, very nuanced feedback. The person takes their own work seriously and is a great photographer IMO. Not too long back they were saying something about my image and I could not see it at all. As hard as I could look the issue was not there. Finally, I messaged them asking what kind of system they were on? Lo and behold, a non calibrated laptop!!! (probably through Internet Explorer too!) I think maybe most photo oriented people know a carefully calibrated desktop monitor, and a non calibrated (or even calibrated) lap top are worlds apart. Well, that becomes a disconnect. That person is not even able to see the image as intended or accurately. Well, I don't mind them giving me critique, but I like them to know what may be necessary to be on the same page. So in a word, I am encouraging a standard.

So off my soapbox now, and back to the image at hand.



Apr 27, 2014 at 02:01 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Panther Take


JimFox wrote:
I like this shot. Perhaps because I have only shot in the Columbia River gorge a half dozen times, I can't say the composition is different from other peoples takes, but I will say that I like it, and it flows nicely. It certainly will look nice hanging in peoples living rooms.

Jim


Thanks Jim. As always I appreciate your feedback. It is on the Washington side of the Gorge if you ever want to shoot there. One of the best waterfalls I have ever seen. Not hard to get to.



Apr 27, 2014 at 02:08 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Panther Take


The image flows very nicely mark.
The shutter speed is perfect in my view. Not too long, not too short.



Apr 27, 2014 at 02:17 PM
Kee Woo Rhee
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Panther Take


So... Mark. Since I am shopping around a decent monitor, I would greatly appreciate it very much if you could recommend one. 27" would be great. Budget: up to $1500.

As to the image you posted here.. I like the composition which seems postulating a letter "X". Yes, very smoothly flowing image. It's like Spring wind blowing into my face. Great. Can you post the image a little bit larger? Thanks.



Apr 27, 2014 at 03:12 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Panther Take


Kee Woo Rhee wrote:
So... Mark. Since I am shopping around a decent monitor, I would greatly appreciate it very much if you could recommend one. 27" would be great. Budget: up to $1500.

As to the image you posted here.. I like the composition which seems postulating a letter "X". Yes, very smoothly flowing image. It's like Spring wind blowing into my face. Great. Can you post the image a little bit larger? Thanks.



Thanks Kee! There are a lot of good monitors in that price range! This might be good: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/personal/2014/04/19/benq-reviewed/7879175/

Or some of the better wide gamut Dell Ultrasharps are rated good. Here is one write up. Maybe Google Dell Wide Gamut Monitor: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/2/14/Dell-releases-UltraSharp-monitors-with-99percent-Adobe-RGB-color-space-support

Also Check our Eizo. Google their monitors. They are great. http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/


But really make sure you get a really good, up to date colorimeter such as Spyder 4 Elite or Pro. This really helps to ensure we are nearly on the same page. http://spyder.datacolor.com/display-calibration/


Personally I calibrate for WEB (not print) at 2.2 Gamma, 6500 White Point and 120-125 Candelas (Brightness).

As far as posting the image larger. I will try to do that soon. I don't know why I accidentally posted it at 800px. Usually I post at 900+px. I am on the road right now and should get back tonight or tomorrow.



Apr 27, 2014 at 03:27 PM
02subyrube
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Panther Take


Love the shot!


Apr 27, 2014 at 03:41 PM
Kee Woo Rhee
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Panther Take


Mark Metternich wrote:
Thanks Kee! There are a lot of good monitors in that price range! This might be good: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/personal/2014/04/19/benq-reviewed/7879175/

Or some of the better wide gamut Dell Ultrasharps are rated good. Here is one write up. Maybe Google Dell Wide Gamut Monitor: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/2/14/Dell-releases-UltraSharp-monitors-with-99percent-Adobe-RGB-color-space-support

Also Check our Eizo. Google their monitors. They are great. http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/

But really make sure you get a really good, up to date colorimeter such as Spyder 4 Elite or Pro. This really helps to ensure we are nearly on the same page. http://spyder.datacolor.com/display-calibration/

Personally I calibrate for WEB (not print) at 2.2 Gamma, 6500 White Point and 120-125 Candelas (Brightness).

As
...Show more

Thanks Mark,

Looks like I need to dig some research to do based on your recommendation. Thanks again.
Your photos are top rate!



Apr 27, 2014 at 03:43 PM
Nigel Turner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Panther Take


There is no such thing as a perfectly calibrated system from one computer to another, just controlled variables.

Nobody even sees color in the same manner as the person sat next to them, even if the RGB values were identical, as our eyes and brain interpret these values differently.

Even two identical computer screens built on the same line, using identical screens and software management with the exact same color profiles built with the exact same hardware will often not match 100% due to different values which we can't control due to the actual panel. And to think that manufactures build millions of these panels a year. Just think of the variation between them.

I've worked in a highly controlled 'managed' digital workflow for years but realized a long time ago that it is a flawed system due to so many variables. Anyone who tries to say different is frankly telling you lies. All we can try to do is to work within certain tolerances that hopefully our images once displayed on the WWW look something like what we as photographers intended them to look like.

I can't be bothered to try and explain this any further here because its a drawn subject, except that color management, profiles and print making are something that we, or I can control 100%!



Apr 27, 2014 at 04:01 PM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Panther Take


The layering here is fantastic. I often feel as if waterfalls lack something without a sense of where the fall originates. Seeing the upper fall framed by vegetation really accentuates what is happening at the lower end of the frame.

Great effort on your part, as I think it definitely paid off.
bruce



Apr 27, 2014 at 04:24 PM
Gregg B.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Panther Take


Nice shot Mark.
As far as calibration and color accuracy goes, well i'm having fun reading some posts here, but I would not agree more. No offense JimFox but maybe Mark and other people you were referring to that post notes about calibrating systems of browsers should stop posting here on FM forums because you don't seem to like it. Next time I post something I'll add such note capitalized
I don't get it... Why would this bother you?



Apr 27, 2014 at 05:12 PM
Mark Metternich
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Panther Take


Nigel Turner wrote:
There is no such thing as a perfectly calibrated system from one computer to another, just controlled variables.

Nobody even sees color in the same manner as the person sat next to them, even if the RGB values were identical, as our eyes and brain interpret these values differently.

Even two identical computer screens built on the same line, using identical screens and software management with the exact same color profiles built with the exact same hardware will often not match 100% due to different values which we can't control due to the actual panel. And to think that manufactures build
...Show more


Thank you very much Nigel. Here we agree 100%!

I think what you said is what Bruce Fraser was addressing in his comment: "...so we need to shoot for the middle of a very wide barn door." All we can do is get our systems as right as possible and then let the chips fly out on the net. That is why critical subtle feedback on these forums sometimes almost makes me laugh. With all the massive variables we are rarely seeing nearly the same thing. I still believe we should give (and get) that feedback though, but it is best done in some sort of standard. Like you say, "I've worked in a highly controlled 'managed' digital workflow for years..." That is all we can do, and then encourage it in others, who may be more serious about viewing accuracy.



Apr 27, 2014 at 05:15 PM
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       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.