Here is the vertical from the same location as http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1168509/0 yet shot at a slightly different time.

As with the other image, this image was nearly finished in raw (ACR) and then double processed for dynamic range using a powerful twist on the Layer Style "Blend If" sliders.

Like I mentioned on the previous thread, I believe, when used to their full potential, the Layer Style "Blend If" sliders are the "holy grail" of advanced blending in Photoshop. They are some of the least understood, least used, least exploited, yet most powerful and easiest ways to deal with most blending issues, especially dynamic range. Instead of complicated layer masks they have the ability to replace most masking techniques for quick and easy, clean, real time dynamic range blending. Some of the many other things they can be used for are: advanced subtle dodging and burning, mid tone contrast, sharpening fall off, controlling highlight glow effects into specific tonalities, increasing texture detail to deep shadow areas, cooling shadows and warming highlights, and more...

Due to busyness of the holidays, the basic written tutorial (to be posted here on FM) on this blending technique, entitled: Blending For Dynamic Range Made Easy - Blend If is about half finished. I am sorry for the delay.

Canon 5D Mark II
Canon 24-105 at 58mm
f/8
100 ISO
1/320 shutter

A lovely image. Even without any PS effort, this image would be a great one.

Mark,
May I ask something? Where is this place you called "remote SW"?
Just Stunning!
-Kee

Excellence !
3D looking image.

That is a fabulous picture,. Where in SW actually?
Thanks for showing

Could this be Palo Duro Canyon in TX?

I am quite curious to find out where it really is.

Thanks everyone. Northern AZ.

Stunning shot Mark - the landscape is freaky cool and the atmospherics add a natural drama. Just amazing.

Phil

Mark - this version far exceeds the previous, the vertical orientation keeps me lingering longer and you controlled the highlights better in the clouds, great light!

Spellbinding! Dave

An absolutely stunning image, I look forward to your tutorial.

Cheers Ray

It is a really interesting image and a nice bit of landscape. I wonder if I am the only person who finds the very high contrast white/red/green in what must be shadow area to be a bit extreme? Don't mean to offend, but figure you might be interested in honest feedback, and I'm interested in how other react.

Dan

gdanmitchell wrote:
It is a really interesting image and a nice bit of landscape. I wonder if I am the only person who find the very high contrast white/red/green in what must be shadow area to be a bit extreme? Don't mean to offend, but figure you might be interested in honest feedback, and I'm interested in how other react.

Dan

An interesting comment. From a purely photographic perspective, I tend to agree with Dan. But from a purely artistic perspective, I find it to be a fantastic image.

It makes me wonder if my photographic perspective has been so influenced by film and history to make me think it might be a bit extreme. Or perhaps I think it should look just like what I see with my eyes and that makes it a bit extreme.

But I also think there is an idealization to the processing that I find extremely appealing and thus, on the balance, I think it is a fantastic image and definitely a nice work of "art."

It also makes me wonder how we will view such images 10-20 years from now, as HDR, blending options (blendif), non-linear contrasting, etc. become more common and perhaps more integrated even into "in-camera" image processing.

Bottom line is that I see Dan's perspective, but I also love the image and thus I find it quite provocative.

Don

gdanmitchell wrote:
It is a really interesting image and a nice bit of landscape. I wonder if I am the only person who find the very high contrast white/red/green in what must be shadow area to be a bit extreme? Don't mean to offend, but figure you might be interested in honest feedback, and I'm interested in how other react.

Dan

Dan, I have also visited this site, and the color certainly is more saturated than my memory of a partially cloudy sunset. I'll write off the green as just the right time of year to produce a bit of growth. As for artistic license of enhanced contrast and saturation, I find this rendition plausible, even if a tad idealized. I really like it!

Mark, I look forward for the tutorial.
Mike K

Don and Dan,
I share Dan's perception too. The PS work makes it great artistically, but makes the photographer in me feel like it is "Photoshopped" or "faked". There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but just that it is our perspective as we have come to view photography as. An artist has the right to his artistic interpretation, and Mark has done a mighty fine job with this image. It is a great work of art. However, I do share Dan's thought as the contrast to be a bit extreme for my taste, of course.

Mark,

Nice work on this, it has a very real 3D feel to it, lot's of depth. I do agree with Dan's comment. I think Don brings up a good point about our vision and where it's headed. I do agree with Mike. I have shot where this is at, and the colors do pop in this a bit more then in reality, but then again, I would probably do the same as I like a bit more vibrant take. And then Maji, I think he nailed it on the head though. It does feel processed. Now there is no doubt, that the public at large will really like this, it has an appealing look without looking so gaudishly HDR. But for most of us as photographers here, probably we would tone it down a bit more. So there in lies the rub, because the people who would buy this have never been to this location or one similar more than likely, and so would not have any arguments towards it being pushed a bit more in photoshop then it was in reality. Though I am sure it was a beautiful scene to behold in person too...

Jim

I'm often sort of surprised when the discussion goes to a question of what the artist has the "right" to do. The odd thing about this is that I do not recall a case - even once - where the photographer's "right" to make his or her decision was questioned. Whether a choice is an effective one or a good one is an entirely different question.

Dan

gdanmitchell wrote:
I'm often sort of surprised when the discussion goes to a question of what the artist has the "right" to do. The odd thing about this is that I do not recall a case - even once - where the photographer's "right" to make his or her decision was questioned. Whether a choice is an effective one or a good one is an entirely different question.

Dan

Hey Dan,

Are you referring to Maji's comment about "An artist has the right to his artistic interpretation"? He is simply stating that as a fact, from what I see, not questioning whether an artist has a "right to edit as he/she see's fit". Though I am sure Maji can comment for himself.

But why are you surprised, if anyone brought up what an artist's right is or isn't? I am not at all. As a group and as individuals as we give opinions and thoughts on what works or doesn't, it could easily be seen questioning someones right to make a decision. We think so often, especially here in America in regards to freedom, yet as a society and as a group even in here, I have seen instances where we have put down someones photograph to extent that person probably felt they didn't have a right to edit their photos as they wanted because of the pressure of acceptance by the norm. I know I have been rather blunt and tactless a time or two in commented for example on someone's HDR photo's. Could that person then not leave feeling like they didn't have the right to process his/her photo's as they desired? Yes, they easily could have felt that because of peer pressure. Even if we didn't specifically say that they didn't have the "right" to edit their shots as they did, that person could easily have left feeling that in all reality they no longer had that right do to our responses...

Just a few thoughts at 2:30am....

Jim

This appeals to me Mark. I find it very attractive and I like the strong colours and detail.
David

Dan and Jim,
Thank you for the discussion. I think Jim stated my thoughts more eloquently than I could have.

As for processing or over processing, it is really up to the artist. If the prints sells well, then more power to him/her. A great example is Peter Lik. His Antelope Canyon photos are clearly over processed. However, they fetch premium prices as they tickle the fancy of a class of viewers. So, nothing wrong with the artist catering to that. My wife was with me in the Canyons and then she comes back and sees Peter Lik's works. She comments that it is Photoshopped, but she likes the vibrant colors. It kind of made me realize this point better.

Thanks to Mark for pushing the envelope. Some of us will not feel comfortable, while some will enjoy it while some will not give a dang... as long as the artist has his freedom to express his/her thoughts, that is what matters.