I haven’t gotten out to shoot much this summer, but here’s at least one photo I shot. I’m mostly happy with it, but I still have some reservations about the composition. I couldn’t find a way to capture the flowers and also get a reflection of the peak in the water. If this was your image, what would you have done differently with the composition? Also, I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on what you might do differently with processing or what I could do to take it to the next level while keeping it real. Thanks!
Hi Eric, Do you have a landscape version? Especially in the foreground, this portrait version feels a little tight. I was not there, so maybe just a change of angle or height of the camera might help. (Just getting the feel of the new site Eric so hope you don’t mind my critique).
Hi Eric, I think with the 2:3 vertical for this spot only…I think the comp is about as good as you can get. Nice lines. The only time I’ve been there I went with the landscape version because its the obvious IMO. Ill assume you were trying to get something a little different by going vertical. I like the slight water ripple and selected faster shutter speed for the water since the reflection really isn’t a big part of the overall comp. Per processing? Its gonna come down to Style and this one fits your realistic style. Me? Maybe a slight darkening of the top 2/3rds that provides a bit more cloud definition? Maybe not… Lastly, theres a black rock/log thats poking up out of the water left center that my eye keeps going back to the more I look at this…
Hi Eva, Thanks for the input. This location was pushing the limits of my 14mm when shot vertically. I did take a horizontal shot but it is simply stiched vertical images at 14mm.
I feel the comp and processing are spot on. I know how hard it is to get a good comp here being so close to the spires. I like the dynamic lines coming in from each side and the perfect light on the peaks. Personally I would dodge the highlights in the foreground slightly to add a tiny bit of contrast.
I like how you’ve tried to emphasize the elephant head in the vertical. However, that puts the flowers and the triangle of grass in competition with the reflection making the foreground composition challenging to view. The landscape version is much easier to look at with the flowers showing nicely in the full page view and a good sense of you are here.
Mark, I think you’ve hit on why I’m not happy with this composition. I hadn’t consciously realized that there is a bit of a fight between the flowers and the reflection. I think you are right. I appreciate the feedback.
Hey Erik, nice job overall on this! I think you did really good. Having shot there many times I know how hard it is. I feel frustrated I didn’t do very well every time I try. Again, it looks good to me, but I would like to see a version with the sky darkened up a decent amount to make it a little more rich. Also, not sure how you feel about this, but maybe clean up (aka remove) some of the small elements from the grass. I think that would make the image look a bit more clean.
Here is a technique I’ve used in the past that can add depth and richness to “weak” parts of an image; in this case, the lit parts of the peaks and the sky, Considering this as a landscape, stitched or not, the peaks and sky are a little flat, at least on my monitor.
First, apply a levels adjustment globally, darkening the midtones somewhere between 7% to 11%, Then using the history brush @ 100% (setting the history brush in the history panel to just before the levels adj), bringing the bottom of the picture back to it’s previous tonality. The final effect should be richer and more contrasty peaks and sky.
The landscape version is the ticket for me. It richly gives a sense of the place and creates much more of a high country mood. I am feeling a bit cramped in the vertical presentation. It is a beautiful alpine scene.
If you stick with the landscape version I would try warping it a bit to get rid of the extreme wide angle distortion, it feels a bit bulbous right now. I’d also like to see a little more space between the spires and the edge of the frame, feels a little cramped.
Both versions are really good. The landscape version displays better on my monitor because it fills the screen better. The portrait format feels a bit cramped because the top and bottom hits the edges of the window but the left and right has space. A white frame may help that look.
On the landscape image I would burn in the sunlit mountain tops on the left a bit. I like the sky as is.
I like the rich greens in the vertical. That and it’s texture.
I agree about cloning out the dark protrusion out of the lake in both versions.
I actually like the FG grass, it pops out of nowhere seemingly and is almost unexpected in a scene like this. The reflections and the comp to me are good, then that FG element adds the final piece and perspective. My take on the vertical is if I walked into a gallery and it was printed huge, then the impact would prevail and there’d be no feeling of being cramped. The landscape orientation looks best in a small image on a blog.
Well, for my tastes the vertical format is the easy winner. I like everything about it…Kane provided some good comments for consideration if you want to attempt some minor changes. There’s a bit of competition between the reflection and the flowers but, on balance, I feel most viewers will immediately lock on the flowers and discover the reflection a bit later as they study the scene. And in that way the reflection contributes to the overall scene rather than distracts.
A beautiful alpine image. The grasses and perhaps more compelling, the reflection/ripples make for a very strong and beautiful foreground. The warm light on the peaks and complimentary clouds make the upper half just as beautiful. Hard to go wrong here. For me though, it just feels a little to 50/50 - like it’s such a beautiful scene and moment you want to capture it all in one shot. Ultimately, I find myself going back and forth between the two halves.
Now the horizontal is more balanced and pleasing, although slightly less dynamic. Not sure what to suggest other than perhaps shaving some sky off the top to keep more emphasis in the lower part of the image.
I tend to agree that the portrait oriented image feels a little tight however the larger view is more compelling. I think there are positive attributes for both versions here. Yes the distortion is a little more noticeable in the landscape version. I think your colors and depth of field are spot on. You could probably even decrease the highlights on the sun drenched spires a tiny bit.
