The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
A couple of weeks ago we flew to KS, and the route took us across a large salt pan west of the north end of Great Salt Lake. This is a Military Operations Area but it is legal to fly under it at low altitudes. Very low. We were about 50 ft above ground, going 150 mph. The water is from a recent rain shower.
Specific Feedback
All comments welcome!
Technical Details
Tonal tweaks in LR to increase contrast, into PS to denoise and level the horizon (slight correction) and clone out a very minor distraction on the bottom edge and some ragged clouds at the top edge. About 95% of the original frame.
Hi Diane,
that looks great. The water streaks lead the eye beautifully to the distant mountains. And the clouds above have interesting shapes.
I love how you used complementary colors here. The blue and cyan tones work well with the sand tones. Maybe I would try to get rid of the magenta/purple cast in the distant mountains to emphasize that.
Thnaks, @Jens_Ober – I’ll tweak some more. I go nuts trying to bring out more detail in distant mountains in aerial shots. The atmosphere has a lot of haze and everything distant is blue and flat. Would be easy to select the mountains and try for a little more detail and color. I’ve brought out more here than I could see, even with polarized sunglasses. I should experiment again with a polarizing filter in situations like this.
I was hoping to see some action in the MOA but never have, in several times going that route. We should be safe unless Maverick busts the hard deck again dogfighting with Viper.
This is something I always struggle with as well. And I tend to add too much contrast or dehaze and then it doesn’t look natural because distant mountains always look slightly hazy.
I think you did a good job regarding the contrast and the details.
But using a Polarizer might be a good idea. I have many shots from our flight that are not usable because of the reflected light on the water’s surface. Next time I will bring my Polarizer too.
I think that would be fun. I keep my fingers crossed that you will be able to enjoy the show at some point.
50ft above ground at 150mph… wow, I never knew that a plane could be flown so low! Obviously there are no obstacles above such flat land but still… that is very, very low?
My first thought upon seeing the image and the focal length: “well, this must be a very expansive view at 70mm!” It looks ultra wide!
I concur with @Jens_Ober points. Very good points!
I took his image into PS and did a couple of tweaks.
I added a slight vignette at the bottom and on the sides (this, in order to lead the eye more to the top of the photo but, looking again, the luminous very FG is kind of nice too, i.e. more realistic… )
The sky looks a little too cyan to my eye, so I did a hue/sat adjust targeting the blues and cyans - may just be my personal preference.
I agree that the contrast in the distant mountain needs to be brought out as best as possible. I thought I’d try a LAB curve. Seems to work out nicely?
Lastly, I find Jens’ mountain a little too green… but didn’t address that. What is closer to reality, or your taste?
Just some of my own explorations here. Hope one or two aspects may be of interest (I’ll keep the PS files for a couple of days in case you want to see the layers)
Thanks, @LauraEmerson! I do think you’re right about the cyan – I’ll do a RP in a while. And I need to tweak contrast in the mountains just a bit. I did a gradient almost to the mountains and lightened the FG slightly. I almost always darken FGs but thought it added a bit of a 3D or sweeping effect here. I’m curious what others feel. I’ll add that comparison when I repost. Thanks for the idea!
50 ft is legal and safe in an area with flat ground and no obstructions or civilization. But there aren’t many places like that anymore. 70mm is about as wide as I can shoot from the plane. The leading edge of the wing is actually ahead of me and almost below the leading edge of the window. So the view is pretty rigidly 45 degrees forward and not very far down unless we bank, and that starts a turn that makes the view quickly move under us.
If I see something good coming I can usually persuade Ted to turn left a little then bank when we get just the right distance from the thing. That can be frustrating because he usually has no clue what I want to shoot.
I love the sense of teamwork you guys have. Although I’ve only met you two once, it’s clear you have been in harness together a while and that you allow each other your passions and quirks even if it’s alien to the other. So he doesn’t know what you’re on about, but he will deliver if he can! Love it.
I think you did a good job with the contrast and detail in the mountain, but why not see if you are able to crank it up a bit? And I agree about the FG. After I posted my comment, the file was still open in PS and made the vignette light by changing it to screen mode, to see what it would do. I think it helps separating the FG from the mountains, resulting in the mountains standing out better. Otherwise, background and foreground are very close in tones with less separation. So yes, in this image it may work better to do the opposite of what we usually do.
