Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 04:20:56 pm

Title: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 04:20:56 pm: Thoughts if any ??
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Christoph C. Feldhaim on January 30, 2014, 04:41:12 pm: I allowed myself an edit.
Cheers
~Chris
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 05:06:32 pm: Quote from: Christoph C. Feldhaim on January 30, 2014, 04:41:12 pm
I allowed myself an edit.
Cheers
~Chris
Thanks Chris for the input. I wondered about going that direction with it.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: WalterEG on January 30, 2014, 05:25:11 pm: I suspect it lives somewhere between the two.

Of the two seen here, I prefer the original.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 05:30:30 pm: Version 2 with Chris' suggestions (as best as I can do anyway).
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 30, 2014, 07:10:50 pm: I much prefer the original to any of the variants presented so far. The chimney and the remnant of the house/cabin are presented so well that they don't need any "enhancement" to create an artificial mood.

A while back I happened on a falling-down abandoned house in the woods, and I tried several shots, but I couldn't get anything as effective as this one. I like it a lot, Todd!
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: RSL on January 30, 2014, 07:15:44 pm: Quote from: WalterEG on January 30, 2014, 05:25:11 pm
I suspect it lives somewhere between the two.

+1

But I don't prefer the flat original. It ought to be possible in Photoshop or Lightroom to extend the tonal range without totally blocking the lows, but I think you'd have to work from the original raw.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 11:14:34 pm: Here is a third rendering taking into consideration everyone's suggestions. ??
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Riaan van Wyk on January 31, 2014, 12:31:47 am: Quote from: WalterEG on January 30, 2014, 05:25:11 pm
I suspect it lives somewhere between the two.

Of the two seen here, I prefer the original.

Same here.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 31, 2014, 03:36:23 am: Quote from: WalterEG on January 30, 2014, 05:25:11 pm
I suspect it lives somewhere between the two.

Of the two seen here, I prefer the original.

Me too.

Quote from: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 11:14:34 pm
Here is a third rendering taking into consideration everyone's suggestions. ??

This has a much more spacious feel to it, but some of the detail in the wood seems to have been lost. ;)

Jeremy
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Christoph C. Feldhaim on January 31, 2014, 03:56:38 am: Quote from: Todd Suttles on January 30, 2014, 11:14:34 pm
Here is a third rendering taking into consideration everyone's suggestions. ??

Todd, you're messing up your threads ... ;)
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on January 31, 2014, 09:15:32 am: In the words of Rosanna Danna...... nevermind
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 31, 2014, 10:31:00 am: OK, this version has punch without looking over-dramatized.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: RSL on January 31, 2014, 03:37:39 pm: +1. The last one is best of the bunch, Todd.
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Christoph C. Feldhaim on January 31, 2014, 03:43:05 pm: Great step forward.
Well done !
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on February 01, 2014, 04:25:11 am: Quote from: RSL on January 31, 2014, 03:37:39 pm
+1. The last one is best of the bunch, Todd.

I agree. I approve of your removing the white branch to the right of the stack, too.

Jeremy
Title: Re: Unoccupied
Post by: Todd Suttles on February 01, 2014, 08:58:00 am: Thanks all for your help. I am learning so much from your input. Thank you, -todd