Union County Snow 2014

[Todd Suttles]

Reactions and opinions? Especially PP. thanks t

[luxborealis]

The question you maybe asking is "how do I turn grass that looks like it's bleached from the mid-day sun, and trees that appear to be IR back into ice & snow-encrusted vegetation?"

What's working against your vision is the flat lighting - something that can't be altered in LR or PS.

Also, the foreground, while carrying detail, does not lead us into the landscape, but acts as a barrier to us entering the experience; again, something that is difficult to change in LR or PS, but can be attempted using graduated masks to give shape to the foreground.

[Todd Suttles]

The question you maybe asking is "how do I turn grass that looks like it's bleached from the mid-day sun, and trees that appear to be IR back into ice & snow-encrusted vegetation?"

What's working against your vision is the flat lighting - something that can't be altered in LR or PS.

Also, the foreground, while carrying detail, does not lead us into the landscape, but acts as a barrier to us entering the experience; again, something that is difficult to change in LR or PS, but can be attempted using graduated masks to give shape to the foreground.

Thanks for taking the time to let me know. It is what I suspected would be said. Live and learn, hopefully. thanks t

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Russ may never forgive me for this, but my suggestion would be to crop (!) the photo to eliminate most of the foreground and most of the sky, and getting closer to the parts that have nice tonal variations.

Here is my version. If you want to maintain the original format, you could crop more off the sides, especially the right.

[Todd Suttles]

Here is my version. If you want to maintain the original format, you could crop more off the sides, especially the right.

Thank you. I see how that helped the composition.

[RSL]

Russ may never forgive me for this, but my suggestion would be to crop (!) the photo to eliminate most of the foreground and most of the sky, and getting closer to the parts that have nice tonal variations.

Well, believe it or not, Eric, I forgive you. On the other hand, I think Terry's got a valid point. On the other, other hand, unlike Terry I'd either eliminate a bunch of the sky or a bunch of the foreground. If I eliminated sky I'd crop close to the treetops, make the foreground stand out, and darken the sky. A better solution might be to crop the foreground and darken both the sky and what's left of the foreground, making the trees in the middle the focal point. It's amazing what the Graduated Filter can do.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Your second is rather lovely, Russ, and I like it. Of course, it might not be what Todd had in mind when he took the shot.

Jeremy

[RSL]

I'm sure you're right, Jeremy. I think I have a fair idea about what Todd was thinking. I've done it hundreds of times. Did it a couple times this morning too. He's looking at what, in nature, is a beautiful scene. Unfortunately the real thing isn't the image that comes out of a camera.

I've been shooting pictures for more than 70 years and I've learned to identify what will and what won't work as an image out of the camera. But I still can't resist -- especially in this digital age where I won't have to develop and dry the film, clean up the tanks, and make contact sheets -- I can't resist trying to capture what just can't be captured with the camera. There it IS! It's beautiful. I want to capture it for myself. But part of the appeal is the air and the sunlight and the sound of the birds and the soft earth under my feet. I can't capture all that with the camera. I probably could come closer with paint -- if I could paint. But even then the image would fall short of the reality.

Oh, and Todd, you have a fair amount of dust on your sensor. Check the images where I lowered the exposure with graduated filters. You need to do a good cleaning. I've found that a gel stick works best and saves all the trouble of a wet cleaning, though sometimes you can't avoid the wet route.

[Todd Suttles]

Well, believe it or not, Eric, I forgive you. On the other hand, I think Terry's got a valid point. On the other, other hand, unlike Terry I'd either eliminate a bunch of the sky or a bunch of the foreground. If I eliminated sky I'd crop close to the treetops, make the foreground stand out, and darken the sky. A better solution might be to crop the foreground and darken both the sky and what's left of the foreground, making the trees in the middle the focal point. It's amazing what the Graduated Filter can do.

thank you Russ for showing me. What a dramatic difference. More than I could have visualized. Is is extremely helpful to me to actually see the way you were able to apply your eye and vision to something I had already "done". I know it's not all about processing, but envisioning without a strong understanding of achievable potential yields lesser results. Thank you for giving the thought, and taking the time, to show me.  t

[Todd Suttles]

I'm sure you're right, Jeremy. I think I have a fair idea about what Todd was thinking. I've done it hundreds of times. Did it a couple times this morning too. He's looking at what, in nature, is a beautiful scene. Unfortunately the real thing isn't the image that comes out of a camera.

I've been shooting pictures for more than 70 years and I've learned to identify what will and what won't work as an image out of the camera. But I still can't resist -- especially in this digital age where I won't have to develop and dry the film, clean up the tanks, and make contact sheets -- I can't resist trying to capture what just can't be captured with the camera. There it IS! It's beautiful. I want to capture it for myself. But part of the appeal is the air and the sunlight and the sound of the birds and the soft earth under my feet. I can't capture all that with the camera. I probably could come closer with paint -- if I could paint. But even then the image would fall short of the reality.

Amen to all of that! My father is a painter. Now that he is 85 he almost exclusively paints from the thousands of slides ha has taken as"reference".

[RSL]

Todd, I just looked at that again. I should have cranked up the white slider in Camera Raw to emphasize the middle trees even more. But what I did at least gives you the idea. You have the raw file. Work on it. It can be good.

[luxborealis]

Well, believe it or not, Eric, I forgive you. On the other hand, I think Terry's got a valid point. On the other, other hand, unlike Terry I'd either eliminate a bunch of the sky or a bunch of the foreground. If I eliminated sky I'd crop close to the treetops, make the foreground stand out, and darken the sky. A better solution might be to crop the foreground and darken both the sky and what's left of the foreground, making the trees in the middle the focal point. It's amazing what the Graduated Filter can do.

Bottom crop is excellent, Russ. Nicely done.

Having taught a number of workshops, besides composition, the thing photographers struggle most with is visualizing the final photograph. This visualization is so important to guide the post-processing of a camera capture towards a final work as so often there is far more potential than one realizes.

[Todd Suttles]

Todd, I just looked at that again. I should have cranked up the white slider in Camera Raw to emphasize the middle trees even more. But what I did at least gives you the idea. You have the raw file. Work on it. It can be good.

Ok thanks Russ. I'll keep at it.