I like the adjustments Matt did. The subtly muted ridge leading from lower right to the "window" with slightly accented light - this creates a cohesive line that leads to the sunrise on the upper left. The tones are more in balance and harmony. Ties the whole picture together. I also like the other adjustments, including the sky.
I stood in nearly the exact same spot about 5 years ago, and came back with nothing that even approaches either of these versions.
Great shot!
bud
bf1951 wrote:
I like the adjustments Matt did. The subtly muted ridge leading from lower right to the "window" with slightly accented light - this creates a cohesive line that leads to the sunrise on the upper left. The tones are more in balance and harmony. Ties the whole picture together. I also like the other adjustments, including the sky.
I stood in nearly the exact same spot about 5 years ago, and came back with nothing that even approaches either of these versions.
Great shot!
bud
I agree. His dodging/burning work added more depth to the scene. He is working on a video showing his steps. As soon as I get it I will post it here.
Best,
Fred
Fred Miranda wrote:
Matt Anderson worked on the file. He had my RAW file and did his version of post-processing. I like it, it has a different rendition and is cropped differently. What do you think?
Hi Fred,
Beautiful shot! It looks like you were hanging from one of the spires surrouding the shot!
I prefer the mood of your version to Matt's, but I do prefer the cropping of his to your original. I felt the lean he metioned in the original, even though I am sure it is shot level.
First of all, the composition and drama of the light is exquisite.
As I am still relatively new, not to photography, but to landscapes, I've been trying to find my way with processing style. I've been an editor for print and online media, so I know what I like and what works generally, I'm just not settled on how to represent myself and my own work.
That all said ... the dodge-and-burn techniques that Matt employed can produce some stunning results and I plan to learn them. However, there is a cadre of landscape photographers who use this approach all the time and invoke a certain "sameness" to their work, in my opinion. You have an image with very strong, dramatic light in the foreground, with many interesting elements in the background that, in your initial edits, do not interfere with the main subject. The second version, while it has a certain beauty, eases one into the scene, while the first just hits you "blam!" in the face.
I also have not particularly liked the dodge-and-burn technique when applied to sandstone formations. I think they already have enough texture without bringing out more detail. I think it crosses a line into the surreal or what I call painterlyness. Many will say that photographers always are painting with light, and I agree. But if one wants to simply paint, why not simply use paint and an easel instead of investing time to ferret out good light, good scenes and investing thousands in digital equipment?
To make it clear, I'm not condemning Matt's rendering at all. I just prefer the first, for the reasons above. Dodge-and-burn probably nails the next one.
Best,
Glenn
P.S.: I agree with another comment that, although I'm sure it's not, the "horizon" feels tilted. I often don't know what to do with that in my own work.
Wonderful image. You've got to love that feeling of the wind and the sun arising -- the best time of day. Well done. (I'm equally keen with Matt's rendition; the tighter version packs in all the beauty.)
Update: Matt just sent me a video tutorial explaining in detail how he worked on my image. (500mb download)
Here is what he wrote me:
"Below is a link to the video. Like I mentioned, I simply did a screen record while I was doing most of the processing. I paused a few times to answer a call or other distraction. I think I forgot to start it back recording once, so it may jump to some additional moves in the recording, if that makes sense. It's pretty dry to watch, but it shows most of the work in real time. You'll see a move really fast. I'm post processing photos almost everyday for my commercial clients, so I tend to move quick. Also, at the bottom you will see a custom window. I made a custom Configurator panel that houses all the common tools, scripts, actions, and functions I use so I don't have to go menu diving (saves tons of time). Someday I may offer this to the masses. I'll send a link to a jpeg screen grab as well. I mention because people are going to see it in the video, and wonder what the hell it is. I've been tweaking, modifying, and refining that panel for over a year now. It makes processing so much quicker. Best, Matt"
I like the image, and it proves that the 24-70 mm is a good lens for the A7r? What tests, if any did you do to ensure that you get a good copy? I am also interested to see your milkyway shots? what lens did you use. Sorry for asking all these gear question. I plan to return to Bryce and want to use the Sony A7r, my previous images were with Canon 5D2.
