The One with the Bigger Brown Mountains

There was a bit of interest in my previous post in the mountains in the background, which I did not shoot very successfully. This is about the best I got. The sky was really not cooperative, and this has a lot of adjustment brush and even some healing of gray over white skies. I share it for additional feedback, but I think the edges between sky and mountain make it technically a deal breaker for me. I do have some abstracts of this location, but I shared those last month as my initial offerings from Iceland.

What technical feedback would you like if any?

Are the CAs too much to take?

What artistic feedback would you like if any?

Does the sheep (white spot) need to go?

Pertinent technical details or techniques:

(If this is a composite, etc. please be honest with your techniques to help others learn)

If you would like your image to be eligible for a feature on the NPN Instagram (@NaturePhotoNet), add the tag ‘ig’ and leave your Instagram username below.
You may only download this image to demonstrate post-processing techniques.

I love the curves here, especially the mid-ground slopes. The processing looks good to me. My only nit is the empty sky in the URC, but there’s nothing you can do about it easily.

Not sure what CA’s are.

I do see a very slight halo on the mountain/sky edge, but it’s not objectionable.

This works for me.
-P

Thanks, Preston. CA=chromatic aberrations. I used the tool to handle that in LR, but I think, between the 105mm limit of the lens, the aperture, and the adjustment brush work, that edge is funky, almost looks like a two dimensional cutout (more two dimensional than most images). I have a half dozen keepers from that mid-ground green. It’s fabulous. I could have spent far more days in that area than we did.
ML

CA’s: That’s what I was thinking, but wasn’t sure. If you have PS, you could create a mask selecting only the sky and work on that with curves, levels, and Hue/Sat.

I would start again from the RAW file, though, making your CA adjustment and global adjustments in ACR and then take the master file into PS and work it up from there. That should help with the mountain/sky edge issue.

It’s a nicely composed image that is worth the tweaks, I believe.
-P

I am enjoying the light on the mountain side despite the gray sky Marylynne. The sheep is so small I would clone it out. I see the fringe along the mountain top but think Preston’s advice will help correct / remove it.

Well, I like the dang brown mountain. CA doesn’t bother me, and Preston’s advise is doable. I know Mark Metternich uses a technique to pull the sky below the horizon. I don’t know how to do it, but in these incidences it might be handy. I’d definitely lose the sheep. I really like this image and I’d do what I could to make it make you happy.

The CA’s don’t show much here, although they might be a problem in a large print if you are noticing them at original resolution. If shot raw, hopefully they are tamable in the converter. The sheep is som small I wouldn’t have even noticed it, but if distracting I’d clone it out.

Marylynne: I felt like I was playing “Where’s Waldo?” with the sheep so I think it’s completely insignificant but also not readily noticeable as a sheep so I’m not sure it adds anything. I love the comp and landforms and think you did well with the sky you had. Making me want to go there. >=))>

Thanks folks. I have included a second effort at the image, better addressing the chromatic aberrations. For comparison, I’m also including a wider view of this. I am really kicking myself about not climbing a ridge behind me to get a view without those blasted lava fields, but alas, I was weary and felt rushed.

Let me know if you like the wider one. It’s a crop from about a 32mm shot (I wanted the breadth, but not so much lava or sky). I have to get in the habit of doing vertical panos in situations like this.

#1 Redone with better CA control

#2 Wider View–about a 50% crop

Marylynne: I like your repost of the original; small adjustments but very positive. In the wide view the lava field is a bit too heavy for my taste but just right in the original. Solid stuff :+1::+1:>=))>

Thanks, Bill. I have another variation on the wide pano view, this one was shot at a slightly longer focal length and was under-exposed, so it had to be brought up, while the one above had to be pulled back a bit. I’m thinking the redo of the first crop is still the ticket, and of course, returning at some point with more time and fewer people.

I would give the second panorama the heavy lava treatment. It competes too much with the background.

What a beautiful landscape. To me this image is all about the repeating green ridge lines, as such, I prefer the original aspect ratio to the pano which places too much emphasis on the foreground lava pile. The repost looks good to me but I can’t detect any CA at this resolution in the original.

Marylynne,
This has really great lines and layers. Based on the display size of the image, I’d clone the sheep out.

I converted it to B&W and flipped it horizontally. I think the lines are stronger from top, left to bottom, right.

1 Like

Thanks @bradley for showing the difference here. I am going to do a variety of b+w conversions on my Iceland images, but I have only carried that out with a couple of waterfall images.

I like the mirror image swap too. I don’t think I can do that in LR, and I don’t really use PS. In some ways, I feel like the Top Left to Bottom Right feels like a smooth ride to the bottom, while the bottom left to top right feels like a climb. Not sure yet which one I prefer. I like “ending in the air” in some ways, but it does draw attention to the too-bright sky.

Thanks for giving me some excellent food for thought.
ML

You’re welcome. I flipped it LR. Photo Menu >> Flip Horizontal.

1 Like

Ah, I would never have found that. I assumed it was PS-only. Thanks!
ML

That white spot is a sheep? That’s a great sense of scale. Maybe you should clone it add a few more. Sheep never graze alone, do they?

Beautiful seen with nice layers. It feels a bit flat contrast and saturation-wise to me, but that’s probably just because so many pictures are so amped up nowadays.

There were others, but they are not white and not as visible. They graze in 3s, cuz the litters are generally 2–according to my Icelandic guide.

I think it looks a little flat too. The light was flat, so that’s part of it, but am prone to underprocessing, especially for contrast. I’ll throw caution to the wind and amplify it a tish.
ML