Taken during my last trip to Yosemite.
Only one capture (for each image) using SR with no ND filters. Both images were underexposed more than 3 stops. SR and image averaging provides very clean shadows even when underexposing images by that much. It's like having a ND filter and exposure bracket sequence built-in in one image without having to combine exposures in post.
Dave Dillemuth wrote:
Very nice! IMO, the streaking clouds in #1 make it the stronger image.
Thanks for the feedback Dave. I'm divided on this and that's why I posted both.
The second one display a less distorted El Capitan since it was not located towards the edge of the frame.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Taken during my last trip to Yosemite.
Only one capture (for each image) using SR with no ND filters. Both images were underexposed more than 3 stops. SR and image averaging provides very clean shadows even when underexposing images by that much. It's like having a ND filter and exposure bracket sequence built-in in one image without having to combine exposures in post.
I hope this makes sense.
A7RII + Voigtlander 12/5.6 III
Both wonderful images. Personally I feel #2 is the best but both are great.
Regarding the use of SR and underexposure by 3 stops - was this to retain the highlights? And the use of SR provided clean shadows for later recovery in post?
Feb 03, 2017 at 05:38 PM
Mark Metternich Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
#2, I'd crop almost all of the water/reflection out. Make the focus that wall of gold. The cut off reflection distracts IMHO. Crop just above the blades of grass poking out of the water on the right. Then the wall because a show piece!
Number 1 is my favorite of the two. I like the fact that you used a wide angle lens yet it seems like a nice tight composition. And there is a primary point of interest with the clouds that hit the mountain yet there are compelling secondary points of interest that compliment, but do not compete with, the primary point of interest.
Don
#1 is really nice, those streaking clouds are cool looking. #2 doesn't work for me as it loses all the aspects that make #1 so nice.
Jim
Thanks Jim,
The clouds were moving very fast that afternoon and I was lucky with my first capture (#1). It thought it would be fun to play with the clouds a bit.
---------------------------------------------
kwilliam8 wrote:
Beautiful images, Fred. The first image is stunning! The clouds really take this up a notch!
Keith W.
Thanks Keith. It was an unusual shooting trip. All opportunities were far from perfect lighting. Sunsets and sunrises were always either cloudy or rainy.
---------------------------------------------
Jeffrey wrote:
The word that comes to mind is Glassy. Excellent imaging, Fred.
Thanks Jeffrey!! The water was almost to my knees for these captures. It was the day after the torrential rain.
Your first photo for me makes El Cap look distorted. The photo's division between reflection and land does not feel strong. The division at the water's edge further divides the photo. I don't get a sense of a concept or idea other than the use of a super wide lens and super strong micro detail in the rock face. I don't feel the glow of an afternoon sun filtered through clouds.
I don't get a sense of feeling in this photo, I get a sense of digital capture.
The second photo makes El Cap feel more stately and more present. It makes El Cap a complete thing/shape. I believe that the grasses are a movement in the photo that if opened up would make this into a more complete feeling and interesting picture. The mid ground trees have a nice more scaling movement to them. The fore ground grasses have some nice highlights, and add to the picture and the sense of perfect timing for this composition as opposed to moving on to the next thing for a less optimal moment of light.
I would also consider cropping in to take out the branches in the upper right corner, but if you found those a problem a different camera position would have left those out of the photo.
If this is a photo you care about I'd spot out the evidence of the road in the right mid-ground.
Aztatlan wrote:
Both wonderful images. Personally I feel #2 is the best but both are great.
Regarding the use of SR and underexposure by 3 stops - was this to retain the highlights? And the use of SR provided clean shadows for later recovery in post?
Thanks Aztatlan,
Although I was happy with the cloud movement on the first, I also prefer the second image.
Yes, SR must be exposed for the highlights and can take a lot of underexposing since it average many shots (In this case 32 shots). The shadows are super clean when recovered in post.
