Sub-Alpine Beauty

Critique Style Requested: Standard

The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.

Description

The zone just below tree line has always been my favorite elevation. Where I grew up in Colorado, it was around 11,000 ft. Here in Glacier National Park, just above Logan Pass the sub-alpine zone, as it is known, is around 6,800 ft. In the mountains, going up has the same effect as going north. Each step up a mountain has the same effect as exponentially more steps north in latitude. At the Arctic Circle, tree line meets sea level. All forms of life here might exist at lower elevations, but the forces of nature have left an indelible mark on them. Trees are short and stunted. They are sculpted by the relentless winds that carry both water and soil. In the places where the land dares to reach for the sky, stone itself is often carved by the invisible force of the wind.

Far below the peaks in meadows such as the one in this photo, soil is held in place by the roots of both living and dead plants. The growing season here is short, as evidenced by the remnants of new Summer snow on the slopes of Reynolds Mountain. These trees are less than 8 ft tall but are likely 3 times the age of their relatives of the same height several thousand feet down the mountain. In a tenacious attempt to thrive, these trees carry the character that time and the elements have forced upon them and I think they are the more beautiful for it. I believe that we humans are much the same. We try so hard to grasp at what time may try to take from us. Perhaps we should embrace what the passage of time does to us and wear it like a badge of honor instead of trying to cover up or “fix” it.

Specific Feedback

This is the first time I have ever blended two shots. I shot both at the same tripod location. There was no light used here other than an occasional hikers headlamp from a trail about 1/2 a mile away. I regret two things about this shot. The first one is that I should have focused on the trees while using a bright light, and the second is that I totally forgot to close up the aperture for the foreground shot. I left it at 1.8 which when I was still focused on the stars obviously did not get the front of the trees very well. I used a variety of masks to sharpen these areas. It’s not perfect but isnt too bad either. I used a corded release for the shutter, and just counted out what I thought was 2 minutes but ended up at 93 seconds. Turns out I count fast when worried about Grizzly Bears! Anyone have any advice on good exposure times for a foreground shot at the same time as the sky? I think if I had gone to f/3.5 or f/4 that even 2 minutes would not have been enough.

Technical Details

Nikon D850
Sigma Art 20mm 1.4
Sky…ISO 5000, f/1.8, 10 seconds
Land…ISO 1000, f/1.8, 93 seconds.


Critique Template

Use of the template is optional, but it can help spark ideas.

  • Vision and Purpose:
  • Conceptual:
  • Emotional Impact and Mood:
  • Composition:
  • Balance and Visual Weight:
  • Depth and Dimension:
  • Color:
  • Lighting:
  • Processing:
  • Technical:

This looks good to me, with enough light to give some FG detail and a nice MW. I don’t have a lot of opportunities to shoot the MW, and especially with interesting FGs, but I never get the results I wanted. (And that’s even with never having to worry about grizzly bears.)

Exposure blends like this are not easy. Re-focusing causes the image size / zoom factor to change due to focus breathing. How much it changes might be different for different lenses, but it could be checked while there is light. I think the usual trick is to just do a much longer exposure at lower ISO for the FG, although wind would be a problem with trees. I’d just rely on a quick review on the camera and adjusting exposure time and ISO to bracket several possible exposures to choose from later.

Thanks @Diane_Miller I should have taken the time to try a longer exposure and different ISO’s. I hadn’t thought about the focus breathing issue but I don’t think it would have affected the distant mountain and since the trees are below the ridgeline, I suspect it would have worked to blend. The sky replacement tool lets you move the sky around which I did a little to make sure there wasn’t a halo around the mountain line. One thing for sure, astrophotography keeps me on my toes and always makes me feel like I don’t know what I’m doing!