Topic: Sunrise at Thornhill Strand in County Mayo (Read 6666 times)

Enda Cavanagh · « **on:** March 31, 2012, 10:26:03 am »

Hi All

I took this photo of Thornhill Strand in County Mayo just after sunrise on a November morning. Normally I process sunrise and sunset photos into colour images because of the beautiful hues at that time of the day, plus the sky usually has a low contrast, which is more suitable to colour processing. However I feel this works nicely in black and white image. I love dune grasses and I wanted to bring out the contrast between the grass and shadows, so black and white would be ideal to achieve that. I decided to photograph the sun with a starburst just as it peeked over the mountain and started to illuminate the grass.

You can click here to see it in a bigger size (Click View Larger image above the image you see first)

Enda

luxborealis · « **Reply #1 on:** March 31, 2012, 10:57:22 am »

Exceptional photograph and processing as we have come to expect from you, Enda.

Having spent more than my fair share of time in the field, especially at sunrise, I can't help but feel the grasses in the foreground are just too bright and contrasty for that time of day. It may "work" for someone who has not experienced that time of day too often, but for those who have, the foreground detail, brightness and contrast seem to be on the side of being artificial rather than balanced with the beautiful scene behind and the time of day. It's great to be able to pull that kind of quality out what would be a shadowed area, but perhaps it's too extreme, at least for my liking.

Les Sparks · « **Reply #2 on:** March 31, 2012, 12:10:59 pm »

Great image. Interesting decision to process sunrise as Black and White. I think it really works and shows that we don't always have to use color to show the beauty of sunrise lighting. Agree that the foreground is a bit too bright.
Les

Isaac · « **Reply #3 on:** March 31, 2012, 12:13:11 pm »

Quote from: luxborealis on March 31, 2012, 10:57:22 am

Having spent more than my fair share of time in the field, especially at sunrise, I can't help but feel the grasses in the foreground are just too bright and contrasty for that time of day.

Without suggesting good/bad like/don't - isn't that "processing as we have come to expect from [Enda]."

Enda Cavanagh · « **Reply #4 on:** March 31, 2012, 12:40:29 pm »

Thanks guys. The grasses are actually starting to get sunlight so I didn't want to have them darkened down. I already had tried that but I wasn't happy with it. Just to see I tried it again and it didn't work for me. Here's a color version to show the sunlight. I'm sure some will prefer the color version but for me the black and white works better for me. It's how I visualized the scene in the first place.

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #5 on:** March 31, 2012, 01:00:44 pm »

The mono version is, well... too monotonous (pardon the pun).

churly · « **Reply #6 on:** March 31, 2012, 01:25:25 pm »

Another outstanding image Enda. I do however prefer the color version. To me it has more structure that pulls you into the image while the B&W is fairly flat. Anyway - nice work.

Les Sparks · « **Reply #7 on:** March 31, 2012, 02:07:31 pm »

Thanks for posting the color version. The black and white works better for me.
Les

Enda Cavanagh · « **Reply #8 on:** March 31, 2012, 02:09:41 pm »

As I said some people would prefer the color

I increased the contrast of the foreground and also darkened the distant hills slightly.

Dewi Sant · « **Reply #9 on:** April 01, 2012, 06:09:29 am »

Beautiful Enda, IMO you were right to go for the Mono. Now about that fence

....Sorry, couldn't resist.

Dewi

Michael H. Cothran · « **Reply #10 on:** April 01, 2012, 08:06:03 pm »

I was fine with the b&w until I scrolled down and saw the color version. Hmmm...both are excellent with fine crafting on your part.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #11 on:** April 01, 2012, 11:31:40 pm »

Yes, both are excellent, but the mono one is the one that really grabs me. Beautiful! I wish your exhibit were on my side of the pond!

Eric

rambler44 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 03, 2012, 08:55:55 pm »

Interesting, but it is the color I like. With the B&W, I would crop down the sky leaving just a little space above the hill. With the color, however, I like the soft blue of that sky.

Enda Cavanagh · « **Reply #13 on:** April 04, 2012, 09:32:52 am »

Thanks guys. Personally I don't think cropping the black and white would work at all. It would have the affect of making the whole area of dune grass way too dominant. I think the gradient tones of the grey in the black and white give the sky at sunrise a nice balance. It needs space to breath.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #14 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:32:22 am »

I agree.

dgberg · « **Reply #15 on:** April 08, 2012, 12:37:40 pm »

Both are excellent. B&W is my favorite.
Such beautiful images and then be distracted by the large copyright logos.
Am guessing you have had problems in the past.
That's another story for another day.

Enda Cavanagh · « **Reply #16 on:** April 10, 2012, 05:46:37 am »

Quote from: Dan Berg on April 08, 2012, 12:37:40 pm

Both are excellent. B&W is my favorite.
Such beautiful images and then be distracted by the large copyright logos.
Am guessing you have had problems in the past.
That's another story for another day.

Thanks so much Dan
Believe me I would much prefer to have no watermark on my images at all but images of mine have already been used without permission. I try to make the watermark as subtle as possible, while keeping in mind whether it can be removed or not in photoshop by an unscrupulous party. Content aware in CS5 (which is supposed to be improved further on CS6) makes removal of unwanted information much easier so I always have to keep that in mind. At the end of the day photography is my job. I am not an amateur photographer so I need to protect the images. I really do hate having to put the bloody things up but that's the nature of the beast I suppose....Of course they are not on the printed images

dgberg · « **Reply #17 on:** April 10, 2012, 05:54:55 pm »

Quote from: Enda Cavanagh on April 10, 2012, 05:46:37 am

Thanks so much Dan
Believe me I would much prefer to have no watermark on my images at all but images of mine have already been used without permission. I try to make the watermark as subtle as possible, while keeping in mind whether it can be removed or not in photoshop by an unscrupulous party. Content aware in CS5 (which is supposed to be improved further on CS6) makes removal of unwanted information much easier so I always have to keep that in mind. At the end of the day photography is my job. I am not an amateur photographer so I need to protect the images. I really do hate having to put the bloody things up but that's the nature of the beast I suppose....Of course they are not on the printed images

72ppi or less usually keeps the thiefs at bay.
But not always,so I guess you have to protect your livelyhood.

Enda Cavanagh · « **Reply #18 on:** April 10, 2012, 06:06:21 pm »

Hi Dan.
Not sure what you mean. It's the width in pixels that determines the size of the image. The panos on my website are 1800 pixels which fill up a 24 inch screen nicely. If I was buying an image I would rather view the image at 1800 pixels with a watermark, rather than at 750 pixels without a watermark. I hate buying stuff on a website whatever it may be without a clear indication of what I'm buying. I used to have the panos at 750 pixels on the website without watermarks and the story I was trying to tell was just getting lost. I guess there is no perfect solution. People know the printed image is without a watermark and they understand that. If someone is more worried about the watermark than the image well I guess that they are not interested in the image anyway.

dgberg · « **Reply #19 on:** April 10, 2012, 07:16:04 pm »

A senior moment.
PPI is irrelevant here as only the pixel dimensions matter.
Duh!

Author Topic: Sunrise at Thornhill Strand in County Mayo (Read 6666 times)