So I’m here on my workshop and so far so good despite some tricky weather the first day. After sunrise we wandered here and there in the Badlands National park. It rained a bit off and on, so we had to pick our moments. I wandered off the roadside to get this dead tree lined up as a foreground element.
Specific Feedback Requested
How does the tree work? I find that many Badlands images are pretty samey, so the green against the weathered dead tree seemed different to me, but what do I know?
Technical Details
Tripod & CPL
Lr for the initial processing. Curves adjustment to improve contrast, sky mask to manage the tonalities there and reduce the blue, the usual texture, contrast, sharpening & nr. Radial filter to bring a ray of light to more prominence. Photoshop for some masking to bring out more detail and nuance in the sky, to isolate and bring contrast to the far hills, bump the yellow mounds a bit and to bring up the dead tree. A bit of a crop to balance the composition.
Terrific landscape image from the Badlands - and kudos for looking out for the new and different. The composition is solid and that dead tree works nicely as that foreground element.
The only further comment about the tree - and perhaps this fair or appropriate to compare to other images, but for the sake of critique, the tree here suffers from the same thing the sapling in the river suffered from in my recent post. And that’s separation from the landscape. Sure, the light gray of the tree is quite easily separated by color from the greens, I think it is somewhat lost in the landscape; and it’s not the tree, but the landscape. The green vegetation is kinda masking the landscape, in the sense that it’s hard to distinguish the physical aspects; the draw/gully, ups and downs, the angles, the slope, etc. It all runs together and takes the tree with it. Now that’s probably overly critical and not sure if it even makes sense.
From a grand view perspective, this works beautifully. I really like the painted hills and the sky/clouds are very complimentary and a plus to the scene. In fact, I could see a pano of this scene - sans the tree!
I do like the image a lot and hope I’m not overly critical.
Lon
As per your usual, the processing is spot on; colors/sat and luminosity spot on for the conditions. At least to me and my monitor.
Thanks @Lon_Overacker - no you’re not overly critical. It is an issue here. I couldn’t get any higher, but forgot I had a center column on the tripod since my usual one does not. Maybe I should have tried that. I can see about lightening the tree more than I did and see if that works to make it more prominent against that backdrop.
I have a lot more compositions in other places without trees. I may even try my hand at stitching a pano since I took photos for one. The place is so wide open. A truly huge landscape.
Kris, I like the sky, the bluffs, the mounds; but not the dead tree in the foreground. I like images and studies of trees dead and alive but this not one of those images. It is a beautiful landscape image with a wonderful variety of colors and geographic elements. Agreeing with @Lon_Overacker that the tree detracts. I look forward to more of your Badlands NP images.
Hi Kris, so glad you’re having a good time at the workshop. This is a great scene, indeed. I am reminded of the Painted Hills here in Oregon, although they are on a much smaller scale. I do think the tree is a bit dwarfed by the grandeur of the larger scene. I also get a strong feel of death amongst an abundance of life. That might be your intension though. I agree with Lon that a bit higher perspective would have allowed those near hills to have some separation from the tree.
It might be interesting to see a similar shot from the area without the tree for comparison.
As always, processing is spot on perfect. I would love to see a pano of those hills.
An incredible scene, for sure and I envy your having had the opportunity to spend time there. But as for the image itself, for me it is trying for and including too much. I see at least six amazing photographs in this scene but trying to get it all in one kind of dilutes the potential impact that a more selective look at say, those yellow hills, the foreground tree or the mesa itself might have. I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t take grand landscapes but to be most effective even grand landscapes require careful selectivity . This is something I’m trying to be more aware of in my own compositions so, maybe I’m just projecting
Good comments above – my thought would have been to try to get closer to the tree, if possible, to make it big enough to extend well into the sky. @Kerry_Gordon’s comment about several scenes here is encouraging to my usual choice of a telephoto for landscapes – sometimes stitched.
So glad you’re having a great time Kris. I want to get up there soon. I personally love dead trees as subjects but in this case, the tree kid of gets lost in this scene. There is too much going on for it to be the stand out that I think you want it to be. I too see at least 2 or 3 compositions here. Did you bring a telephoto lens with you on this trip? Something like a 70-200 could have allowed you to zoom into a couple of the scenes that I see. Because there is so much going on I cropped a portrait version that includes the dead tree, the yellow mounds to the right of the tree that I like a lot, and the tip of the pointed butte in the background. I’m also including a crop of mostly just the right side of the image to reduce the clutter. Wish I was there.
Ah yes, the telephoto. I did bring one and used it, but just not here. I kind of wish I had, but I like the crops @David_Haynes and will play with it a little. I’ll also check to see if I have a shot without the tree. I can’t remember! It’s all a blur in a way and I’ve been on the road driving quite a bit.
I did a couple of pano sessions @Diane_Miller - haven’t played with them yet so we’ll have to see if any come out or if any of the slices are useful as individual scenes.
