Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Landscape Showcase => Topic started by: Martin Kristiansen on May 29, 2018, 04:51:05 am
-
Went to Tibet and actually didn’t know that Everest was on the iteniry. One morning on the trip I asked my partner where we were going that day and she said Everest Base Camp. Apparently I never listen to her. It was awesome. This from the Chinese side.
-
Magnificent view, it sits like a jewel at the end of the valley! It's an invite to get a lot closer, even at the expense of hours of hiking.
Well done.
-
I always love an image with depth, and this has it in buckets - well seen and composed and presented - fantastic!
-
+1
-
+2.
-
+3
-
+4
;-)
-
Really nice shot and a place I might like to see one day. Love the scale.
-
Thank you everyone. Really enjoyed the entire trip to Tibet. Highly recommend it. As ling as you don’t mind altitude.
-
Wonderful.
-
Lots of feeling in the photo. It would be even better if you tamed the halo at the mountain edge.
-
Lots of feeling in the photo. It would be even better if you tamed the halo at the mountain edge.
You are quite right. I’m a printer by nature and tend to be sloppy about images I process for online use. As much as I tell myself I should pay more attention I just never do. Not that it helps but I promise the print has no halos.
-
Very well seen! Thanks for sharing!
-
This could be a good example of how too short focal lengths kill the sublime of the mountains… (The kantian Mathematical sublime).
-
This could be a good example of how too short focal lengths kill the sublime of the mountains… (The kantian Mathematical sublime).
What exactly do you mean by that?
-
What exactly do you mean by that?
It's difficult to me to explain the kantian Mathematical sublime with my very poor english, but the web is full of very good expositions of this concept.
I mean that the wide-angle makes the mountains seem small and far away, killing their esthetical power (regardless of kantian theory) and also their ontological value: it gives more importance to the pebbles in foreground than to the mountain they come from...
-
It's difficult to me to explain the kantian Mathematical sublime with my very poor english, but the web is full of very good expositions of this concept.
I mean that the wide-angle makes the mountains seem small and far away, killing their esthetical power (regardless of kantian theory) and also their ontological value: it gives more importance to the pebbles in foreground than to the mountain they come from...
OK. I thought that what you mean. But in my opinion you totally miss the point of what I was trying to say. The mountain, as big as it is, hides behind other peaks and you simply don’t see it as you walk up this enormous valley. Eventually you come over a rise and there it is, snow covered and gleaming among the dark pebbles that make up the landscape you are walking over. I was actually trembling with excitement to catch this first view.
Compositionally I realized the problem I faced was one of directing the eye to the mountain so in post I made sure that the images was mostly low key with a bright point indicating the mountain. I placed that bright point in a classic easy to perceive position in terms on the rather overworked rule of thirds. I didn’t want it to be about a simple image of Everest. My feelings weren’t simple and I wanted to try to convey the mystery and difficulty of getting to the mountain. I think I am correct in saying that the bottom of Everest and where we were walking is higher than any point I’m Europe, a little over 5000m. A forbidding place.
Out of interest this was shot on APSC with a 17mm focal lengths, FF equivalent of 25mm. A little wider than is normal for me but hardly extreme. Also it’s not the wide angle that makes the mountain look far away, the mountain was far away. If you want a nice picture showing the the mountain bigger, there are literally millions available, or go to google earth.
-
I like that Everest is deep in the photo rather than upfront. As Martin notes it's a view photogs often forego, or leave on the editing room floor, in favor of the grand closeup. IMO it works great here due to the lighting.
-Dave-
-
I think it's clear that Martin has deliberately made use of the wide angle lens to present an uncommon view of something, and that, in my opinion, is highly commendable in photography - particularly when done as well as was the case here.
-
Sometimes, the mundane aspect of the foreground serves to accentuate the opposite, the majesty of the distant background. As in life. Nothing looks so appealing as a distant goal. Kant or no Kant, or any other homophone.
-
or any other homophone.
:-) (and I agree with the rest of your point entirely).