Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Michael's Phlog => Topic started by: michael on October 07, 2014, 02:06:07 pm
-
This topic is for discussion of the image and commentary found in Michael's Phlog (http://www.luminous-endowment.org/pages/phlog1.html) titled Scuttering Clouds – 4AM (http://www.luminous-endowment.org/pages/phlog16.html).
-
Scuttering Clouds
fwiw.. Looks HDR. Without knowing ahead of time, it's not obvious to me that that is the moon. Could be cloud filtered sun. Cloud motion blur is a bit disorienting. Makes me dizzy, doesn't take much these days.
Amazing detail in the shrub line along the fence. Backlit did it.
In a show, I would hang this on the "experimental" wall. Interesting (borderline haunting) but not evocative for my taste.
-
I like it a lot. I imagine a print would make clearer that the bright object is the moon, but IMO it doesn't really matter. The large tonal range is obtainable in a single exposure with this camera…whether or not to make this particular use of it comes down to personal taste. I'm cool with it here.
To go where camera tech seems to be pointing, maybe even leading us, or not? Each new development poses this question.
-Dave-
-
Well, you can't tell that it's the moon from a 600 pixel online image. That's why I put a 100% crop lower down the page.
The web sucks for viewing subtle images.
Long live the print!
Michael
-
Michael, if I understand your approach the moon received about 2 seconds of exposure while the rest got about 18. However, the moon retains surface detail that I would expect to be blown out at f/4.5 and 2 seconds. Was highlight recovery in post used to bring prevent blowing out the moon or was there some cloud cover that reduced the moon's exposure?
-
Hi Michael,
I like that image, thanks for sharing!
I won't really agree that the web sucks for viewing subtle images, if you post a 600 pixel image it is essentially your fault that you posted a 600 pixels image.
We will soon enough have 4K, hopefully all around, that will make the web a better place to present images.
But, I agree on prints, but prints are hard to share. Also, prints are limited in reflectance range compared to the luminance range of the screen.
Well, as someone used to say: "Horses for the courses".
Best regards
Erik
Well, you can't tell that it's the moon from a 600 pixel online image. That's why I put a 100% crop lower down the page.
The web sucks for viewing subtle images.
Long live the print!
Michael