Sunrise at Antelope Flats, Grand Tetons National Park featuring Mt Moran. There were microscopic moose and elk out there which I’ll share later. Taken last September during a visit with our son who lives in Bozeman, MT from the view area of Jackson Lake Lodge, Several people with super binoculars pointed out the animals to me. My longest lens is a RF 70 -200mm. I think I need to get a longer lens if I want to shot microscopic moose and elk.
Type of Critique Requested
Aesthetic: Feedback on the overall visual appeal of the image, including its color, lighting, cropping, and composition.
Emotional: Feedback on the emotional impact and artistic value of the image.
Specific Feedback and Self-Critique
There were a lot of clouds that morning and the Grand was hiding in the clouds. I like the low hanging clouds and fog on Antelope Flats and subtle color in the sky. The sun is coming up behind me.
Do these conditions give you a sense of serenity and quiet?
The fog and smoke from distant fires in Idaho give Mt. Moran a fuzzy, hazy look. Is this a distraction or does it add to the aesthetic and emotional impact?
Technical Details
Canon R5
Canon RF 24-70mm at 70mm
1/20 sec f/11 ISO 200 RRS Tripod
I saw this one on Facebook and my first reaction is ‘Bali Hai’. That really dates me I know. Bali Hai was that forbidden island that would appear mysteriously out of the fog like an apparition. People thought it had powers. This image has a similar mystery about it. I would remove the richness of the colors of the aspen trees in the llc, or I would clone them out. I would not crop above them because that wide space gives that sense of distance and thereby adds to the mystery and majesty. The low contrast works well for this image.
…and I remember ‘Bali Hai’ from South Pacific. The two days we were in GTNP, the whole mountain range was mysterious compared to our previous visit the year before with bird blue skies. I have a picture of the Middle Teton from those same few days this past September that is even more mysterious. I’ll post that next instead of the microscopic moose and elk.
Hi Eva,
what an awesome scene. I love the subtle color palette and the transition from the cooler tones in the foreground to the warmer tones in the background. And the trees in the distance give a nice sense of scale.
Yes, it does. The mist in the foreground creates a calm morning mood.
I don’t think that it is a distraction. It goes well with the misty mood.
I traded in my 70-200 for a 100-400 at some point and have never regretted it. I also often use it for landscape photography.
May I ask what “microscopic moose and elk” is? I hope it isn’t a silly question.
I love the atmosphere in both the sky and the two strips of fog and low hanging clouds. I find the Tetons nearly impossible to photograph without haze. Not sure why but in all my attempts I’ve never taken a clear image of the Tetons. Reminds me of trying to shoot the grand canyon. Almost always hazy.
In this image the haze works really well because of all the visible atmosphere. The low lying fog in the near foreground really works well for me and breaks up the flat expanse of the foreground. I am enjoying the warmer foreground and cooler background as well. You already took care of the one little nit that I have about the image and that is the aspen peaking into the bottom of the frame. It’s great to see a view other than the Snake River overlook. Well seen, Eva!
This is wonderful. Love the mood, atmosphere and this has such a painterly look.
Absolutely!
Aside from the aspens at the bottom you already took care of, I’m wondering if removing some of the contrast in the lower part of the frame might enhance the mood further? Then again, I like the clarity upfront, then fading as you go deeper in to the image.
Beautifully framed and processed. And a great and unique landscape from the Tetons!
@Jens_Ober
“Okay, I get it, “Microscopic Moose” was meant literally. I apologize for my average English. I knew it was a stupid question. ”
No need to apologize Jens. Sorry, I meant it as a joke. There were a lot of people around me spotting animals (moose, elk, grizzly bears) down on Antelope Flats with their binoculars. Took me a while to spot them even after they pointed them out to me.
Such a beautiful scene, Eva! It looks like a painting and yes it definitely has a peaceful feeling to it. I also love your microscopic moose photo! I like the way the moose is silhouetted in the surrounding environment. Such soft, pretty colors. Very lovely captured!
Stunning scene! I wonder about just a touch of Dehaze on the upper half or so, but that might spoil the mood.
The 100-500 is a perfect accompaniment to the R5, and throw in the 2X if you want to do wildlife. It is amazing! I’m convinced animals get smaller every year. Dragonflies definitely do.
Thanks Diane. What 100 - 500 do you use. Canon or other? Saving up to get a bigger lens. I like photographing birds at my feeder also but my 70 -200 just doesn’t do.
I meant the Canon RF 100-500, but a budget-friendly alternative is the EF 100-400 II. (NOT the older “I” version.) It is amazingly sharp, focuses down to 3 ft as does the 100-500, so makes a great semi-macro lens for things you’d rather not get close to (rattlesnakes and poison oak) and handles TCs very well. Get a 2X III to pair with it to have a 200-800.
The 100-500 has a physical limitation when you attach a TC, so that either one will only go on when the lens is zoomed out to the 300mm mark or longer. So you’d have a 420-700 or a 600-1000. That 100-400 doesn’t have that limitation.
I have had the Canon 600 II for about 100 years and it is the admittedly informal basis for my lens comparisons. The newer 100-400 and the 100-500 actually handle a 2X a little better than the 600 – but microscopically better. (I haven’t shot the 600 III and suspect it is a little better.) But these days the differences can be made up in the subtle sharpening available in LR, or better in Topaz Denoise, which does a little sharpening in the default settings. The other difference in lenses is contrast – a no-brainer to correct these days.
The 100-500 and 100-400 are virtually the same size and weight and very easy to handhold. The 600 is a concrete block, and at f/4, with a close subject like songbirds the DOF is about 1/10 of an inch. The slower zooms actually profit from the smaller apertures for DOF for close subjects. And the R5 has such tight grain, if you don’t underexpose badly the noise is negligible and easily fixed by Topaz DeNoise or probably similar plug-ins.
Check my birds on my website – most are shot at my feeders due to extreme laziness. The birds in the 2021 and later Favorites galleries would mostly be with the R5 and 100-500.
When I look at this it at least feels slightly crooked, like it is slanting downwards to the left. You could also lose a little off the bottom edge, those little patches of grass sticking in aren’t adding anything, and while the foreground is beautiful, I think it’s important to just add a tad bit more emphasis on the mountains. Since the foreground is shaded you can also cool it off a little more as well which will bring out more of those colors and draw the eye towards the soft warm light in the background more.
Love this one Eva, especially your edit! As to some of the above comments, I sometimes like the effect of knocking back the contrast of bright spots along the edge.
