Marc,
excellent series. Another set of keepers. In the first one, it sure is pretty, the reflection in the pond should be darker than the clouds/sky.
2nd one is really cool..the clouds look like balls of fire shooting out from the sides of the mountain.
I'm really digging the B&W. Very nice tones in that one.
Sunny Sra wrote:
In the first one, it sure is pretty, the reflection in the pond should be darker than the clouds/sky.
This is true, and I've been told the same thing at times. But, to me, it begs the question... do people (especially in Marc's case, prospective customers) really notice?
maybe that isn't the issue, maybe we're striving to create realistic art, and it shouldn't matter who is viewing/buying we should be portraying the scene "as it was". but that's just it... filters and at times multi-shot processing can yield results that are actually more true to what the eyes see on-site, but they can create problems such as an incorrect reflection (or unnatural exposure... an entirely different issue). do we try to fix these? leave as is? do we darken the whole foreground to make up for it, or just try to darken the reflection?
I don't want to hijack this thread, but i think since someone has made the comment, it would be interesting to see other's thoughts on the matter. Marc, what's your take?
Jul 15, 2007 at 02:11 PM
David Leask Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
yldan wrote:
This is true, and I've been told the same thing at times. But, to me, it begs the question... do people (especially in Marc's case, prospective customers) really notice?
maybe that isn't the issue, maybe we're striving to create realistic art, and it shouldn't matter who is viewing/buying we should be portraying the scene "as it was". but that's just it... filters and at times multi-shot processing can yield results that are actually more true to what the eyes see on-site, but they can create problems such as an incorrect reflection (or unnatural exposure... an entirely different issue). do we try to fix these? leave as is? do we darken the whole foreground to make up for it, or just try to darken the reflection?
I don't want to hijack this thread, but i think since someone has made the comment, it would be interesting to see other's thoughts on the matter. Marc, what's your take? ...Show more →
What's my take? Well - I can tell you for certain that no prospective public buyer is going to notice or care at all. This is simply something that photographers debate. Do I care? Not really. Neither do most other pros who do the same thing, sometimes even intentionally to great degree. I would really, really, like to stay away from the whole topic of how photography pertains to reality in general, as I'm sure we've no doubt all discussed this many times. I do like to hear comments like this though. If you can think of anything you'd do differently, anything that stands out, any nit-picking, whatever, let me know about it. Sometimes I hear something that I really just missed, or should have changed, or some new ideas I hadn't thought of. Other times, it's just a simple difference of personal preferences. I like to hear suggestions regardless.
I wish I had time to leave a long comment, but I am in a huge rush to leave, what I will say is you are the best landscape photographer around today IMO, that I have seen, and these latest WOW factor image are all up to the Adamus standards. You are my biggest inspiration so thank you for continuing on to produce these images, it drives me to be better.
Marc, i would love to know if you've done much cropping on these pictures. the reason i ask is i had myself convinced that 24mm is wide enough on a 5D, but both you and Matt in the Peruvian Andes thread are quickly convincing me that i need to get my hands on that 17-40 lens for landscapes. any thoughts on that would really be appreciated. stunning pictures.
roberto1979 wrote:
Marc, i would love to know if you've done much cropping on these pictures. the reason i ask is i had myself convinced that 24mm is wide enough on a 5D, but both you and Matt in the Peruvian Andes thread are quickly convincing me that i need to get my hands on that 17-40 lens for landscapes. any thoughts on that would really be appreciated. stunning pictures.
Definitely, get your hands on a 17-40! It's not that expensive and you REALLY do need the 17mm wide angle IMO. Look at the new 16-35 too if you can stand the weight and price. I'd say at least 40% of my shots are taken between 17 and 24mm. There was very minimal or no cropping on these images.
Congrats on your very productive trip, Marc! Numbers 1 and 2 are my top pics. On the first photo there appears to be a straight white line on the right side in the sky. I first thought it was a contrail, but it is hard to tell. If it were me I would probably clone it out, but I don't think too many folks will notice or care.
Great imagery Marc, Of course I'm not surprised . The B&W image is outstanding, one of your top images for sure! Excellent tonal range, comp, etc. on that one. Excellent!
Nothing short of stunning, Marc. You continue to be an inspiration to all of us! I still don't know how you get such sublime light and do incredible clouds just trail along behind wherever you go? Number two is my pic, those clouds framing the peak are to die for!
Edited by Scubatography on Jul 17, 2007 at 08:26 PM GMT
Wow Marc those are awesome! You take the kind of photos I long to take, your images are fantastic. You mentioned Singh Ray filters, which ones do you use?
