The Valhallas

[sdwilsonsct]

The processing here was inspired by Larry Angier's recent triptych, and the long lens used was on the recommendation of Hans Kruse. I have learned a lot from many people on this site, and am grateful for it.

Feedback welcome.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Just a tad more aggressive cloud processing than I would prefer. Good idea, anyway.

[Jeremy Roussak]

I agree with Slobodan. It's a potentially fine image but this version looks to me a little overcooked.

Jeremy

[Martin Kristiansen]

I’m definitely with Slobodan and Jeremy on this. The image has merit I believe but the post is heavy handed. 

[sdwilsonsct]

I’m definitely with Slobodan and Jeremy on this. The image has merit I believe but the post is heavy handed.

Thanks, folks! I'm off to shoot in a minute but will revisit the processing soon.

[Kevin Gallagher]

 Hey, whatsa matter with youse guys, ya's never heard of "well done"? Like medium and rare only different! 

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Hey, whatsa matter with youse guys, ya's never heard of "well done"? Like medium and rare only different! 

So perhaps we should say:
"It's rare to see such a well-done image in this medium."   

Scott,
My own impression is that I would prefer it cooked to suit Slobodan and Jeremy.

[francois]

I like it as it is but would also be happy with less ominous clouds.

[Paulo Bizarro]

I like it, conveys the intended sombre mood. Darker clouds to match the dark line of trees.

On the other hand, it seems to me that some areas of the mountains have been lifted in terms of exposure/shadows? IMO, a bit too much.

[sdwilsonsct]

Hey, whatsa matter with youse guys, ya's never heard of "well done"? Like medium and rare only different! 

"People who order their meat well-done perform a valuable service for those of us in the business who are cost-conscious: they pay for the privilege of eating our garbage." -- Anthony Bourdain. Article.

Ok, I see what you mean. Here's another try, medium rare.

Thanks to all.

[thierrylegros396]

Looks really far better now.

Thierry

[Jeremy Roussak]

I think the sky looks much more realistic. The ground was lighter in the first image, and the new, darker ground seems to me to take something away: the contrast between peace on the ground and incipient violence in the air, perhaps.

Jeremy

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Jeremy beat me to it.
I like the new sky but the old ground.

[francois]

I like both version although I have to admit that the second one looks more plausible.

[brandtb]

I think the processing is better in the second. I think the composition struggles either way. You have a really dominant cloud component which overpowers and then some very interesting peak shapes in distant, some hills in mid-ground, then tree silhouette in foreground - I don't think these all work together to make a strong "whole" and don't think processing is going to overcome that.

[stamper]

Second image is better. A fine composition.

[sdwilsonsct]

I think the sky looks much more realistic. The ground was lighter in the first image, and the new, darker ground seems to me to take something away: the contrast between peace on the ground and incipient violence in the air, perhaps.

Thanks, everyone for your comments. My feeling was that the bright forests were a processing artifact, so I left them darker in version 2. Given the inescapable and global artificiality of processing, however, I might try them lighter again. Good suggestion.

Brandt: yeah, the appeal of the composition is limited.

Stamper: glad you liked it.