Stormy Scenic, San Juan River Canyon and Monument Valley

Image Critiques Landscape Critiques
1

Stormy Scenic, San Juan River Canyon and Monument Valley.
Stormy Scenic, San Juan River Canyon and Monument Valley.1500×1500 1.38 MB

This image was taken in a place I found by accident near the Moki Dugway in lower Utah. I wanted to see what the dugway was and was running out of daylight when I arrived, so I followed a road west that took me to the overlook. I stayed for 4 or 5 nights. I’d never seen photos from this location that I can recall. I did come across one by Ted Orland and others a few weeks later. The area is called Muley Point, it is near the top of the dugway and NW of Mexican Hat.

Taken about 5 PM in mid-May it was a time of day most people would be shunning for photography, but I liked the light on the slopes of the canyon and the distant storm - I often shoot later (AM) and earlier (PM) than the “magic” hours. The raw color file (below) didn’t process out like I had hoped. I realized that it was screaming at me for a monochrome treatment due to the textures and contrasts. Plus, I didn’t like the sky in the color version and lightening the sky didn’t balance with the foreground in color.

IMGMK2_13768-3
IMGMK2_13768-32000×3000 1.51 MB

I used a gradient masks on the two forward buttes, then 3 more on the back ground and sky. I reduced the harsh dark clouds then worked individual areas with the brushes. I used a total of 18 adjustment brushes for local contrast controls in different areas. I figure I have 18 – 20 hours over 5 days spent on this image. It is all LR and no PS/Lumenzia.

The B&W image was split toned to my version of a lightly gold toned image. The square crop was to get rid of a problematic sky and it just looked better as a square.

Specific Feedback Requested

Any honest comments or criticisms welcomed. How do you feel about the tonal rrange througout the image? Does the square format suit it better than vertical.

Technical Details

Is this a composite: No
ISO 200, 65 mm, f/8, 1/500, Tripod.

1 Like
2

The image is great. You’re obviously an experienced photographer. One thing in the image is that the zig zag lines near the bottom are very powerful elements, making it reluctant for the viewer to look upwards towards the sky. That was my impression. This seems to be typical of Grand Canyon images where you need a really dramatic sky to balance out what’s occurring below the rim. The upper 1/3rd makes a great peaceful image just on it’s own. I played around with crops and came up with this one. It’s just a different view - not better. I prefer the vertical to the square. My 2 cents.

PS. The bright wedge on the left needs burning in.

IMGMK2_13768b
IMGMK2_13768b1224×1420 770 KB

3

What a lovely b&w conversion - the range of tones is wonderful. I rather like your square crop. It gives me a feeling of solidity and the weight of time. Technically, I see a bit of dark haloing around the farthest right butte in the background (around that U shape); maybe a bit of brush overlap.

4

It’s a very beautiful image, Guy! I love it in black and white, it really improves the shapes and textures and clouds. And the square crop is much better in my opinion than your original vertical. I love all the canyons in the foreground and the neat looking cliffs in the distant fog!
Why did you decide to shoot it vertically? Also if you had changed your settings maybe to a smaller f-stop, higher shutter, ISO 100, couldn’t you have eliminated some of the lighting problems you talk about? I only ask out of curiosity, as I am still learning. Also, I can’t even imagine working on an image on the computer that long! You sure are dedicated.

5

@igor_doncov
I like your crop of the image, and in that case it does indeed need burning down on the triangular form in the lower left.

Just for geographic accuracy, in case someone may want to go there. This is about 100 miles east and a bit north of the farthest east end of the Grand Canyon, which is near Page, AZ. The river in the image is the San Juan as it flows out of Northern NM toward Lake Powell. The Colorado River flows into a different arm of Lake Powell near Hite.

Thanks for taking time on the image.

@Bonnie_Lampley, I looked for what you were referring to about the dark halos. I didn’t see any, though I did see an unevenness in the tone of the rightmost butte. I am wondering if what you see is in fact the dust near the ground where it gets lighter toward the ground level leaving the upper portions a darker tone. It hadn’t begun to rain at that point and the winds were moving quite a bit of dust. The processing did involve darkening those buttes just a bit to make them read better. This may have increased the affect of what you see.

@Vanessa_Hill, - addressing your points one at a time.

Why vertical? I shot this both ways, I also shot the horizontals weighted both to the left and the right. In both cases there was too much visual weight in the foreground (competing masses left and right) and the background above those areas was not interesting - features flattened out as you got further from what is now shown.

What you thought might be fog is dust. It was quite windy out there, much less where I was.

Would f-stop or ISO help solve the problem I was having with the clouds? Both ISO and f-stop were constricted by my physical limitations. I have tremors in my hands that make it difficult to achieve sharpness in probably 8 out of 10 images handheld. Even with stabilization, anything hand held is a gamble. I mistakenly put that I used a tripod in the tech info above, this was hand held. Otherwise I would have multiple exposure of the same framing. So no those options wouldn’t have helped, the problem was subjective taste.

f/8 is the sharpest point for the lens I was using (28-70, f-2.8, L, USM, Canon). At times I will go to as much as f/11 but beyond that the image quality begins to falls off and creates more work. I also know that when focused at anything past

The ISO could have been changed, but a lower ISO means a slower shutter and therefore more possible problems with shake. I also don’t see a reason to go any lower, Any slight difference between ISO 100 (or even 50) and ISO 200, in the file, are insignificant in the conditions I was in. Without some expensive testing apparatus, problems would be visually undetectable.

A higher ISO would have helped but I was confident with where I was in terms being able to maintain sharpness handheld with that lens. If it were the 70-200 lens I would have needed a tripod all the way to 1/1500 sec.

I should state that the 20 hours was over about a 3 week period. Each time I made changes I thought it was finished, until I looked at it again.

1 Like
6

Thanks for all your explanation! So if I understand correctly, for such a grand landscape you don’t usually need a small aperture? Since the foreground wasn’t super close. I’ve kind of noticed that with certain scenes.
I’m sorry about your tremors.
I understand though about handheld as that’s all I do. I think I thought you were using a tripod so thought you had more flexibility with settings, but from what you’re saying the settings were perfect and it was just an image you have to do a lot of work in post processing anyway.
I really do love it!

7

@Vanessa_Hill, If you wish to include something in the foreground then you need to consider the focal length of the lens and the distance to the foreground subject. Here using hyperfocal distance can be handy.
If I am using my 24-70 lens @ 28 mm, f/8, I can carry focus from 5.619 feet to infinity. If, that is, I set my focus to the hyperfocal distance 11.239 feet. Because of the inaccuracy involved in portions of a foot, I will use the next smallest aperture to insure a bit of depth of field overkill. For instance f/9.5 will focus about ½ foot closer and well beyond infinity on the long end, without changing the hyperfocal distance - where you are focused.
You may already know this but if you don’t: If you don’t have one already, you can download a depth of field app on your phone. I use HyperFocal on my Android. You input your camera ahead of time so it uses the correct Circle of Confusion, then input the focal length of the lens. Tap on the Set Focus Subject box and tap on Use HFD. It will indicate the correct hyperfocal distance to set the cameras focus at for maximum depth of field. The hyperfocal setting is used mostly when needing things in the foreground in focus.
Lenses have a “sharpest” f-stop. Usually 2 stops down. Beyond that they begin to soften to a point of unacceptable quality. That was taken into consideration when I took the shot. You can go to the lens tech sites for detailed info about your lenses. https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/ or https://www.imaging-resource.com or search: camera lens testing site.

1 Like
8

I really like this image as presented. I also appreciate your foreground response to Vanessa and inclusion of lens tech site.

9

Thank you, so much, Guy! I looked at the site, it’s really cool! I will use it, even though I don’t have a super fancy camera it is in the list!

10

Really love your picture as presented.
Love the mood of it.
Very nice