Congratulations to Nubcake for winning Feature Thread of the Week with 7 votes - View Previous Winners
Hi guys,
I took this shot at the famous Pfeiffer Beach in the Big Sur State Park. It is a 2 shot blend. One for the milky way and one for the glow from dusk. I really loved that place. I'm curious about your opinions.
Very nice composit. I like the composition and the evening glow through the doorway. The sky is a bit bright, but I guess you need the contrast with the rock. Did the smoothing effect of long exposure on the water not look good?
The image doesn't make any sense.
The Milky Way is far too intense for the time of day represented.
As is the light through the rock.
It can only be a one or the other. Regardless, it's not a landscape photograph, it's a digital blend.
So, as I question that, then I wonder if that was even the location and angle of the Milky Way.
There are others like this that end up in the digital art forum.
Sorry…not a fan of composite MW images where the foreground is exposed at a different time-frame from the sky. I get the idea of different exposures for the sky & foreground; but these need to be approximately the same time-frame, IMO. I like the concept, but the execution is too contrived for me.
This image messes with my mind a bit but if I just take it as a creative composite, I really like it. I like the darker tones in the arch and also the MW looks quite good. Great concept - thanks for sharing.
It's great to have a vision for a shot, its something we all should have. But in this one the end result feels like two disjointed visions.
For me it's odd seeing that much gold light coming through the keyhole if this is twilight, I wouldn't have thought there would be any gold light to come through there at that point.
The biggest thing is the sky just doesn't match the ground layer and it feels like it was pasted on from even a quick glance. Perhaps darkening the blue of the sky to match the dark of the ground. As it is for me at least, it feels odd that the sky which is supposed to have been shot at night is brighter then the ground layer which was shot during the day (twilight). My mind can't deal with two opposites.
This one might need a redo from the beginning? You have an interesting idea, just need to work on it a bit more.
Perhaps just work off the twilight image. If it was at twilight there should have been a few stars poking through that could make for an interesting image too.
Gary Clennan wrote:
This image messes with my mind a bit but if I just take it as a creative composite, I really like it. I like the darker tones in the arch and also the MW looks quite good. Great concept - thanks for sharing.
Hey Gary,
If that's how you take this as a creative composite, then as Craig suggested it should just be in the digital art forum.
I like it. Whilst it's not necessarily 'realistic' I think you've done a great job of the blend. I think this sits as naturally as you could have made it considering the image encompasses a golden glow from twilight and the milky way from total darkness.
If that's how you take this as a creative composite, then as Craig suggested it should just be in the digital art forum.
Jim
Hey Jim. If you think it is not appropriate here - just go ahead and move it. IIRC, many composites have been posted here over the years. In fact, it probably happens far more often than we think. I don't think it violates any Landscape forum rules but I could be wrong. I'm certainly not offended with it being here and happen to like the image...
I believe the merits of the photo is whether or not it's pleasing to the eye. For me it's pleasing to my eye.
I do see a nice artistic representation of the transition from sunset to night in a single blend. This is a sellable picture.
Does it look like what I would see with my own eye - no - but then again a good portion of the pics that are posted on this forum look unnatural to my eye. Are landscape pics suppose to be just a faithful recording or can they also be an art? I'm also mindful there are no landscape posting rules or landscape definition for this forum - only posting guidelines.
I've learned long ago you are not going to please everyone. We are individuals with our own personal tastes.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Hey Jim. If you think it is not appropriate here - just go ahead and move it. IIRC, many composites have been posted here over the years. In fact, it probably happens far more often than we think. I don't think it violates any Landscape forum rules but I could be wrong. I'm certainly not offended with it being here and happen to like the image...
Hi Gary,
For sure, if I thought it violated any rule, I would move it.
Most often when I comment like that, it's simply to discuss it as a group. As you know there isn't always a hard fast line as to what is a Landscape image and what would make an "outdoor" photograph perhaps better situated in another category or forum here. It's always healthy to think, ponder and discuss.
For sure, if I thought it violated any rule, I would move it.
Most often when I comment like that, it's simply to discuss it as a group. As you know there isn't always a hard fast line as to what is a Landscape image and what would make an "outdoor" photograph perhaps better situated in another category or forum here. It's always healthy to think, ponder and discuss.
For sure, if I thought it violated any rule, I would move it.
Most often when I comment like that, it's simply to discuss it as a group. As you know there isn't always a hard fast line as to what is a Landscape image and what would make an "outdoor" photograph perhaps better situated in another category or forum here. It's always healthy to think, ponder and discuss.
Jim
First of all, I really like the resulting image. The vision is clear, it was well executed. Regardless of the reality of a scene this medium is art and it's about showing your vision. As another posted mentioned above, this is a very sellable image. Well done.
At the risk of derailing this thread...
...in regard to the point about this belonging in the digital arts section or here, I fear that if that rule was followed a very high percentage of images displayed here would also need to be moved. Time and time again unrealistic digital blends and composites are shown here...often lauded as being exceptional, but rarely criticized for the points that seem to have been brought up here. If the OP was trying to present a realistic vision, the comments about being confusing and unbelievable are quite helpful. For the artistic vision called out, it may be argued as inapporpriate. It is rare for me to understand the dynamics of virtual social interactions but I frequently feel there is a bit of a good-ol-boys club to this and other sections of this great site. I would love to see that go away. There are a lot of great images posted here that get ignored (and I do it too). Encouragement, even a simple click of a like button go a long ways towards encouraging others to share their vision. Don't we all learn from what we see?
The OP clearly called this out as a blend. I really appreciate the clarity and openness. I find it quite helpful to know details like that so I can better understand techniques to show my vision.
Wow, that's cool. As a pretty serious amateur astronomer, I like the Milky Way in the photo of the beach.
It irritates me that people object to this, as much pp as goes on. Pretty much any time I see a Milky Way, I assume the image is a composite. They might not all be, but the stars are moving, and if you have a long exposure, you'd blur either the stars or the earth-bound scenery. Also, there's a LOT of pp in astrophotography.
End result is definitely art. Composites come and go but these days I have seen a lot of impossible things being brought up. On the sites like flickr, 500px and so on, they are the ones getting most attention.
I have been watching this forum for a long time to see landscapes around the world and would like to believe they are mostly real as I plan to visit some places in the future. However this picture cannot happen in reality. Not only is the mix of MW and light conditions impossible but also now I am not sure if the MW really exists in that direction at all. I would be seriously pissed off if I made a trip there from Finland and on the location realized it was not a real one.
From Assassin's Creed: "Nothing is true, everything is permitted."
Archive 2016 · Stargate
