Taken at same time as recently posted weekly challenge texture image.
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.
Technical: Feedback on the technical aspects of the image, such as exposure, color, focus and reproduction of colors and details, post-processing, and print quality.
Specific Feedback and Self-Critique
As with the weekly challenge post I was attempting to an image different from the iconic color images produced from the summit of Steptoe Butte. Although there was already some beautiful green landscape, I wanted to document the other areas so I used a 100/400 at 200. It was also very windy and cold.
Technical Details
7DMKII; 8.0; 1/250th; 640 ISO; spot; 100/400 @200; cloudy; handheld. Small amount of dehaze.
I’ve always been drawn to images of large area, rolling hills like you have here.
The lines created by tractors, hay balers, hay trailers, etc. is an added bonus for me and maybe that’s because I spent my childhood on a farm in central Minnesota.
I always imagine how nerve racking it must be to be on a tractor or hay baler on the side of a hill and having to be very aware of potential tip overs, one of my brothers did that very thing, fortunately he wasn’t hurt but it was a close call.
I really like the composition and the darker fields through the central portion of the image work very well to add separation and depth.
I wonder, have you tried different hues or color temperatures on this image, I know from my own edits how sensitive the color temperature sliders can be, I wish Adobe would add a “fine adjustment” function for color temperature like they did in the masking mode for hue (in Lr and ACR), they have a “use fine adjustment” checkbox for their hue slider and I think that adds a lot more control (at least for me).
This is subjective, but this image seems to have a slight cyan (maybe even a little green?) color cast and it seems to be a little flat looking, that can be a subjective thing as well.
I have included an example edit just to demonstrate what I feel might be worth exploring.
I’m not suggesting you make any changes, I’m just offering an alternate view.
In the example edit done in Ps, I added some contrast, added a bit of yellow and red (in the color balance mask) to offset the cyan, increased the gamma a little (in the exposure mask) and finally I used a slight amount of High Pass Filter which works well at making darks darker and lights lighter, that adds depth and definition but it’s worth testing opacity settings because it can easily go too far and look way too contrasty.
Anyway, it’s just a thought.
I really enjoyed viewing this image, it brings back some fond memories and it’s simply a pleasing image to view.
Maybe the adjustments could fall somewhere between the original and my example? That’s totally up to you. You could also disregard my example completely.
Jim, this is sensational. I love the muted colors and lack of boosted contrast. It’s quite relaxing really. I think your 200 really helped to isolate the hills, curves, and subtle textures. One of the better and more unique views from Steptoe. Well done.
@Merv@David_Bostock Thank you for the comments. @Merv After viewing your version, I think somewhere between the two is probably my preference, but closer to mine than yours. That would come closer to what I saw, at the time I took the photo. At different times it was probably a bit closer to your version. Green cast: the new growth was just emerging. Perhaps that is what caused it. Cyan: Not sure where that came from. On my monitor there is a hint of it. I’ll work on your suggestions. @David_Bostock Since I live only 3-4 hours away, I am fortunate do be able to visit the area during what some refer to as “off” times. I don’t believe there are “off” times, only times when some prefer not to shoot there. Looks like some snow there the next few days.
Only work on it if you think it needs it, I was just offering an alternate view for you to consider… or reject. I’m at a disadvantage because I don’t have any memories of what it was like in person, mine was part speculation, part personal interpretation and the rest was targeted at producing as much depth and definition as I can through highlights, shadows and contrast (which isn’t based on the actual scene, just what might be possible).
I do like to recreate color and contrast as close as possible in most of my images but there are times when I just want to create as much depth and definition as possible even if it doesn’t represent the scene accurately (in terms of color and contrast).
Maybe the color casting is from atmospheric conditions?
I’ve seen the atmosphere heavy with smoke and/or some form of smog or other airborne material that can produce some strange color casts even if the subject isn’t far off.
Not saying that’s the case here, just an observation from some of my own shots.
Smog can produce some really strange colors depending on temperature and lighting conditions.
Who knows?
Thanks again, Jim!
Edit: I should have added that most of the edits on my landscape images where I add contrast and other treatments are ones where I’m trying to eliminate unwanted atmospheric conditions like haze and smoke for example.
You mentioned that there are times when the scene is closer to your original, while other times it’s closer to the example edit I did, could that be the result of varying atmospheric conditions?
Just wanted to be more clear about why I edit some to have more pop vs other times when I try to replicate the scene as I remembered it being.
Sorry I forgot to include that last part in my original response.
Only work on it if you think it needs it, I was just offering an alternate view for you to consider… or reject. I’m at a disadvantage because I don’t have any memories of what it was like in person, mine was part speculation, part personal interpretation and the rest was targeted at producing as much depth and definition as I can through highlights, shadows and contrast (which isn’t based on the actual scene, just what might be possible).
I do like to recreate color and contrast as close as possible in most of my images but there are times when I just want to create as much depth and definition as possible even if it doesn’t represent the scene accurately (in terms of color and contrast).
Maybe the color casting is from atmospheric conditions?
I’ve seen the atmosphere heavy with smoke and/or some form of smog or other airborne material that can produce some strange color casts even if the subject isn’t far off.
Not saying that’s the case here, just an observation from some of my own shots.
Smog can produce some really strange colors depending on temperature and lighting conditions.
Who knows?
Oh I like this Jim! What a beautiful image of flowing lines, and the green just breaking through the brown is an excellent touch. I played with crops that removed the background, and those are very enjoyable too!
Great job isolating the rolling hills with the longer focal length. Also great to see an image from here that isn’t about the greens…
I particularly like the layers - light - dark - light; the tones/colors separate the layers nicely and I find it all balances very nicely.
Given the lack of contrast, one assumes there is a heavy overcast. Fortunately, the varying shapes, colors and textures are enough for some visual contrast. I think though, and it’s a matter of personal preference, that a slight boost in contrast could work. I did that, and then also the help separate the layers even further, I burned the center layer and dodged the top and bottom layers - if ever so slightly.
At first I thought I wanted to not have the road up top, but after viewing a few times, I think it provides some context, scale and otherwise is part of the story of the Palouse.
@John_Williams@Lon_Overacker Thank you for your helpful comments and suggestions. To all who have responded: One of the best things about NPN is what comes from the comments. Lots of suggestions and all result in improvements now to be put to good use in the future. Thank you.
| 
Jim Gavin: