Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Garden of the Gods again  (Read 5160 times)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Garden of the Gods again
« on: August 18, 2012, 04:21:44 pm »

I've been sitting on this one since the first of the month, but I keep coming back to it, so I guess it's worth posting.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

jule

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 738
    • http://www.juliestephenson.net
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2012, 03:03:28 am »

Russ, Thanks for posting this image. The first thing which I found the most striking were the triangular shapes of both the mountains and the trees. I then thought "What would work to accentuate these elements more for me?". I thought then about removing the colour - so just the shape and texture were the predominent elements. I did a quickie monotone conversion - I do hope you don't mind. Please tell me if you would have preferred that I had not done so. I am certain it could be done better - but just as an illustration of my thought process to accentuate what I felt were the most striking elements of your image.

I actually love the texture of the rock. I love the shapes of the triangles. I also love the two trees on the lowere left and right - sort of mirroring each other with their opposite tonalities.

Julie
« Last Edit: August 19, 2012, 03:06:03 am by jule »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2012, 04:35:08 am »

Russ, Thanks for posting this image. The first thing which I found the most striking were the triangular shapes of both the mountains and the trees. I then thought "What would work to accentuate these elements more for me?". I thought then about removing the colour - so just the shape and texture were the predominent elements. I did a quickie monotone conversion - I do hope you don't mind. Please tell me if you would have preferred that I had not done so. I am certain it could be done better - but just as an illustration of my thought process to accentuate what I felt were the most striking elements of your image.

I actually love the texture of the rock. I love the shapes of the triangles. I also love the two trees on the lowere left and right - sort of mirroring each other with their opposite tonalities.

Julie


Oh Julie, now you've brought AA into the conversation/conversion! Think of all the time and effort he could have saved himself if he'd gone digital: a prophet indeed.

Actually, think of all the time he could have saved if he'd taken up music. Claimed it was all 'bunk' but what did he find in the world of photography that was any different?

This is Sunday; I never enjoy Sunday anymore.

Rob C
« Last Edit: August 19, 2012, 11:34:13 am by Rob C »
Logged

jeremypayne

  • Guest
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2012, 09:57:39 am »

I think the color pallette is a bit banal and the image is better without ...
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2012, 01:28:12 pm »

Julie, Jeremy, I guess I don't need to point out that I disagree or I'd have made the grayscale conversion right off the bat. And Julie, I never mind when someone posts a suggested revision to one of my photographs. I encourage it, but rarely agree with the conversion. So far, Slobodan has made one home run and a one-base-hit by doing that, but I can't think of anybody else I've agreed with.

It's all very discouraging. I wish you could see the 13 x 19 I just made for my portfolios. My heart always sinks as I convert from 16 bits to 8, from ProPhoto RGB to sRGB, then from PSD to jpeg, and watch the degradation at each step.

There are three things going on here. First, there's the repetition of shapes, which Julie pointed out. Second, there's the contrast between complementary colors. I haven't boosted the saturation. This is the way it is. Third, there's the incredible color in the rocks. Here's a 100% crop that maybe may help, at least to imply what's in the print. These aren't the kinds of boring rocks Ansel did in grayscale. The color in these rocks is astonishing. Furthermore, in the print, every tiny stone and rock chip is resolved.

I'm beginning to think that LuLa is a place to post street photography, not landscape. Michael posts some wonderful landscape, so does Chuck Kimmerle, but even with them it's necessary to extrapolate from a shrunken, compressed sRGB jpeg to what the actual PSDs or TIFFs and the prints must be like.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2012, 03:18:17 pm »

"I'm beginning to think that LuLa is a place to post street photography, not landscape. Michael posts some wonderful landscape, so does Chuck Kimmerle, but even with them it's necessary to extrapolate from a shrunken, compressed sRGB jpeg to what the actual PSDs or TIFFs and the prints must be like."

But Russ, that's a route to a dead end. You can't possibly guess accurately what they see on their monitor and even my little cellpix look rather different when I see them on my monitor straight from Photoshop, or even on my own website, never mind on LuLa's option. You've just got to live with it and be happy, or not post anything at all. And that would be a pity.

Rob C
 

 
 

Bruce Cox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1077
    • flickr
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2012, 03:24:15 pm »

Those rocks are beautiful. I miss seeing those - not any granite here. I think what the black and white version does is remove the barrier of the green trees. The green becomes another tone that allows the shapes to benefit the composition. The color version inhibits the composition as the green trees are just too prominent and not attractive enough to deserve so much attention. Perhaps another time of day or year would work better as you might get more light in a more interesting way on the rock itself.

Sharon

 

+1  regarding the photograph.  As to the rock, I think it is sandstone.

Bruce
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2012, 04:35:59 am »

:D I have been yankeefied...



Sounds different, possibly tickles, but ultimately leaves me confused. Can you explain?

Rob C

P.S. This is not intended as a sweeping condemnation of U.S. citizens and/or their practices past or present. No commercial inference is drawn.

Chris Calohan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3509
  • Editing Allowed
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2012, 11:23:55 am »

As this is probably more an anomoly of image degradation from the original to a workspace print, I am almost hesitant to note what appears to be a bit of oversharpening in the original posted image. Almost.
Logged
If it Ain't Broke, Leave it Alone; if it is Broke, Fix it; if it's a Maybe, Play With it - Who Knows

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2012, 11:46:24 am »

Chris, There may well be a bit of over-sharpening. As usual, I forgot to go back to the original and used the copy that was sharpened for printing. On the other hand, I don't see the over-sharpening in the monitor display, maybe because my eyes are 82 years old.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Walt Roycraft

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 442
    • roycraftart
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2012, 02:49:41 pm »

I think the B&W image is more powerful and impacts me more.
Logged
Walter Roycraft
http://www.roycraftart.c

Walt Roycraft

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 442
    • roycraftart
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2012, 02:51:19 pm »

Forgot to add, sans vignetting
Logged
Walter Roycraft
http://www.roycraftart.c

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2012, 05:12:12 pm »

Okay, here it is from my own conversion. It's okay, but I think it loses some of the depth that's in the color version.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2012, 06:06:20 pm »

Rus,

This is not a criticism but an observation:  there is a sense that you did not have your heart in that conversion.

Why can't our intentions or motivations as creative spirits be left alone.  You see it as a colour shot, then it remains a colour shot.  Simple.

W
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #14 on: August 20, 2012, 06:15:45 pm »

You're probably right, Walter. I DO see it as a color shot, for two reasons: (1) I caught the light at exactly the right time to give some serious depth to the picture and to separate the two spires in it. The grayscale conversion tends to subdue the effect of depth because color is part of the depth effect. (2) The actual colors in the rocks are stunning. Yes, Ansel shot stuff like this in grayscale because that was all he had, but it's not all WE have. Knowing how much experimentation Ansel did, I'm pretty confident he'd grab the incredible color capabilities of digital and hang on for dear life.

As you know, I'm a grayscale enthusiast in street photography, and in most cases I'm a grayscale enthusiast in wabi sabi photography, but I'm not a grayscale enthusiast in landscape. That's much too nineteen-tennish.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

WalterEG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1155
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #15 on: August 20, 2012, 06:26:57 pm »

Rus,

Clearly, you are well in tune with your inner man and that is exactly as it should be.  It is far too sad for words that so many are not heeding the beat of their own drum but the drum of some possibly dead stranger.  If we are not ourselves then what the hell are we doing?

W
Logged

Dale Villeponteaux

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2012, 07:59:35 am »

I see now why it's called the Garden of the Gods.  The foreground rocks look like two fossilized gods.

Dale V.
Logged
My avatar isn't an accurate portrayal; I have much less hair.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2012, 11:10:36 am »

You're probably right, Walter. I DO see it as a color shot, for two reasons: (1) I caught the light at exactly the right time to give some serious depth to the picture and to separate the two spires in it. The grayscale conversion tends to subdue the effect of depth because color is part of the depth effect. (2) The actual colors in the rocks are stunning. Yes, Ansel shot stuff like this in grayscale because that was all he had, but it's not all WE have. Knowing how much experimentation Ansel did, I'm pretty confident he'd grab the incredible color capabilities of digital and hang on for dear life.

As you know, I'm a grayscale enthusiast in street photography, and in most cases I'm a grayscale enthusiast in wabi sabi photography, but I'm not a grayscale enthusiast in landscape. That's much too nineteen-tennish.


Not so; I used to think the same too, until I received Patricia's book of AA's Letters and discovered that he was commissioned by George Waters, Jnr., of Eastman Kodak to shoot a sequence of colour pictures for the huge Kodak Coloramas for Grand Central Station in New York City. Seems he found it quite difficult to achieve, and that he had many fallow trips in the attempt. It seems he used Kodachrome. Live 'n' learn!

Rob C

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2012, 11:58:59 am »


Not so; I used to think the same too, until I received Patricia's book of AA's Letters and discovered that he was commissioned by George Waters, Jnr., of Eastman Kodak to shoot a sequence of colour pictures for the huge Kodak Coloramas for Grand Central Station in New York City. Seems he found it quite difficult to achieve, and that he had many fallow trips in the attempt. It seems he used Kodachrome. Live 'n' learn!

Rob C

Rob, I'm not surprised, and you shouldn't be surprised either. I'm sure you've used Kodachrome. I sure have, and it's not easy to work with. Its biggest problem is that its colors are vastly oversaturated, so the problems with color that HCB talks about in his books and that I mentioned in http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=69802.msg553598#new are exacerbated.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Garden of the Gods again
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2012, 03:07:11 pm »

Rob, I'm not surprised, and you shouldn't be surprised either. I'm sure you've used Kodachrome. I sure have, and it's not easy to work with. Its biggest problem is that its colors are vastly oversaturated, so the problems with color that HCB talks about in his books and that I mentioned in http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=69802.msg553598#new are exacerbated.


Kodachrome: pretty much earned my best years with it. However, unlike some who swore by 25ASA I settled for 64ASA and it was fine - mostly. There were times when it was sabotaged by some of the various labs that could handle it: the very best I ever used was the one at Lausanne; Madrid was a hairy disaster and the UK was good if you took your stuff there by hand, paid for the Pro service, and picked your films up the next day. I liked that; gave us a free afternoon and night at the Post House in Hemel Hempstead where Kodak did their thing, an ideal way to come down from the high of the trip that produced the pix. I still sigh about those days!

Rob C
Pages: [1]   Go Up