Here is a bit more of a classic aspen autumn image - from two different outings. I had never photographed this spot before even after literally decades driving around the June Lake Loop in the Eastern Sierra for many seasons. Then finally this fall, it looked like there was potential when I passed by late in the day and so decided to return early the next morning. Well, I did manage a few images before this one, but knew I had arrived too late to give myself enough time to explore - the sun creeps over the ridges quickly.
So it’s quite rare for me to have an aspen image, or trees for that matter that include direct sun. But I’m posting to see how you folks think. I moved on soon after this as the scene got too hot and washed out.
I returned the next morning a good 40 min earlier because I wanted to get the full width of the stand and capture a pano of the scene. Only a 4 image pan, but composed of 2 x 2-image focus stack. In other words I did a 2 image focus blend of the right half of the scene, and then for the left half. Then stitched the two resulting images together.
What technical feedback would you like if any?
As always, curious the get feedback on the processing; color, sat, etc. etc. A quick note on processing that this includes a LAB Color layer used to boost the color/sat/contrast and also another layer with a psuedo, made-up Orton effect at low opacity. Some dodging/burning in the grasses and a few crude clone jobs to hide a few small hotspots.
Feedback on the pano format as well. Better without the direct light?
What artistic feedback would you like if any?
Curious on any crop or presentation suggestions or artistic merit in general
Any pertinent technical details:
Image #1 is also a 2-image focus stack; one for the grass, second for the trees.
Nikon D800E, Nikon 24-85mm at 72mm f/11 1/4s
Lon, very nice classic aspen images. I prefer the first image because of the lighting. For me the shadows and highlighted tree tops create more mood and interest. If possible, it would be interesting to see a pano or wider perspective of the grove with the sunlight as shot in image 1. I also prefer how the smaller row of Aspen in image 1 are more prominent and add a bit more depth to the scene along with the slight angled position to the tree line. Technically I think both images are well done. Nice work on both scenes!
I prefer the first. The trees feel cut off in the pano and I like the overall comp in the first. I might clone out the trail on the right in the first, I find my eye pulled to it. Real nice takeaway from the loop.
Lon, as presented I slightly prefer the first image, but I would have much preferred the pano if the tree tops were not cut off. Is it fair to assume that there was some distraction or bald sky that led you to crop the trees in the pano? What I like about the pano is that it offers a richer mix of colors, yellow/orange/green, whereas the original is primarily yellows. And the light is more even in the pano as well, which creates a calmer mood. i also like the more expansive feel of the pano, the original feels cramped in comparison. I guess I’m changing my mind while writing this, I prefer the pano even with the cropped trees.
Lon, if you don’t mind my asking about your processing technique, I have a question. You said you used LAB color adjustments to boost color/contrast/saturation. I have read a little about using LAB to separate colors, especially yellow and green, I think it was originally from Dan Margulis “Man from Mars” technique. I experimented with it a couple times, but it seemed like a lot of effort. Do you find LAB based adjustments provide superior results over using HSL adjustments in LR or PS? For a scene like the pano version I might normally use HSL in Lightroom to push yellow more towards orange, and green more to green to get better color separation. Are you doing something similar to that in LAB, or are you doing other types of LAB adjustments?
Hey @Ed_McGuirk, thanks for the comments and question.
Regarding the LAB adjustment. I guess like anything else there are many versions and ways to do this, but I believe I’m using some version that you referenced, but honestly, I don’t recall where or who I learned it from. I know I googled it.
Basically, I’ve set up an action for this, so it’s not really too much extra effort. I still use HSL adjustments depending on the need and do a lot of “painting” so as to mask areas I want or don’t want adjustments. But the advantage and main reason I like to use this technique is the versatility. By using various blend modes and opacities you have many options. The blend modes I use are Normal, Soft Light, Overlay, Color or Saturation; many Soft light or normal. Typically the opacity is pretty low because the changes I want are to be minor and not so obvious(just like I might use an Orton layer at a 10% opacity.)
Of course there are many, many techniques. I know Preston and others might use something as simple as adding a Curves/Levels adj layer and simply changing the blend mode to Soft Light and reduce opacity to taste - without even make an adjustment.
In a nutshell:
Duplicate the bg layer (or what I do is duplicate image, flatten, duplicate bg layer, change mode to LAB)
On that layer, add a Curves layer. Rather than RGB adj, you have Lightness, A & B. One channel adjusts Blue/Yellow, the other Magenta/Green (forget which is which, A or B) Anyway you drag the end points towards the center to some value equally (for both blue/yellow and green/magenta"
The results are gawdy and extreme. However, once you take this LAB layer and put it on the top of the stack of your original and start playing with the opacity and blend modes, you’ll see the results.
Anyway, it’s just a different of I know are dozens of methods to accomplish similar things. And to be perfectly honest, I have NO IDEA if this is a good “pixel preserving” technique. I looks good on screen, but not sure if I’m degrading pixels for print, if that makes sense.
For reference folks, I actually did shoot 2 images to stitch for a pano the first morning. This was taken just 3-4 min before the top image where the sun entered the frame. Anyway, you can see the restraints on including anything more up top with that big chunk of sky, and also notice the light from the mountainside in the way background of the left side. This one below was quick and dirty processing, no crop or cloning
I prefer the warm light in the first image. It would be nice if the sunlight penetrated further down to the base of the trees, though. The grass has been processed really well, which is usually a challenge to have it provide as much interest as the trees. A crop without the grass is probably better but still pretty cliche.
Marc Muench wrote in one of his books that backlight is the most desirable of directions. I have trouble with it because the tree trunks get too dark. But here you’ve processed them nicely.
The group of long graceful trees above the log are really interesting. I often see a group like that but don’t have the long lens for them. So I get closer … and the comp starts to break down with the inclusion of the sky.
Great question @Igor_Doncov and thanks for asking. I hadn’t even asked myself yet. I have to say the panorama. It’s because I love the aspen and this image is about the white boles, the canopy of color and I too think the grasses came out good here. There’s a lot to explore in the pano, including the small saplings in the center an a few interesting dead logs in the meadow. I also can imagine this is where many a deer may bed down for the night…
I’m pretty happy with the first one being able to include some sunlight. To me, the top image is about the glancing first light and not necessarily about aspens per se. I think that one could use some luminosity work in the lower parts. And as you put it Igor, wishing the dappled light was further down. I just didn’t stick around long enough.
Yup, happens all the time to me. I did walk among those trees and while I did photograph the grouping on the left, much closer, it just didn’t have the same impression on me as I moved around. Definitely things change when you move in. Oh, those are the “drive by” images we all experience. You’re driving along, or even walking and spy something while you’re moving. You stop, go back and quickly decide it wasn’t as good as you thought it was…
Lon, thank you for taking the time to provide such a detailed description of your technique. What you are doing is very similar to the Dan Margulis method. I’ll have to revisit LAB based color adjustments, and play with the blending modes a little. It certainly did a great job on the images here.
Lon, nice takes on this. I am leaning toward the OP. I like the how the light goes from soft to more bright, and I love the color of the sunlit trees. I agree with Harley about cloning the path. The layers of color in the OP give this a nice mood. Well done!
-P
Thanks @Ed_McGuirk. I’m glad you asked the question. It’s actually made me experiment even more. I’ve now tried combining the LAB color work with Orton! Of course, just like any other technique in PS, each image is different and all these techniques don’t need to be, or shouldn’t necessarily be applied. Just a tool in the shed.
For example, and I may post another image from the fall trip just recently processed.
Use my action to create a duplicate image that has the LAB Color mode applied
On that duplicated LAB image, I replicate the base layer, apply Gaus Blur, change blend mode to Screen and flatten. (this image now looks Hideous and gawdy. But wait.
Drag the LAB/Orton image back on to the top of the layer stack of your original image.
drop the opacity (10-20% YMMV) and pick your blending mode of choice. Normal works
Like I mentioned earlier, there are dozens of ways to accomplish the same thing. Most of my changes I try to make subtle changes with a goal of being believable and making the image the best it can be.
