Stirling Ranges

[vjbelle]

Another GREAT how to series.  Working with the various aspects of layers is always very interesting and this lesson especially brought out how to take an average image and make into a great image.  Very well done!!

Victor

[Geoff Wittig]

Hmmmmm...
This image has been pushed a long, long way from the original capture, depicting entirely fictitious illumination on the nearest hill. I certainly do my share of dodging & burning to nudge an image where it needs to go to convey a three-dimensional impression on that flat paper surface. But completely invented light seems more like photo-illustration than photography to me. It's no longer a sincere attempt to convey some sense of what it really felt like to be there; it's slipped its reality-based moorings.
I've always felt a bit ambivalent about the extreme moves made by folks like Alain Briot as a part of artistic printing of color photographs. I know this is completely illogical, but drastic tonal and exposure changes strike me as more justifiable in black & white prints, which are already abstracted from reality. Color photos to my mind have at least a bit of an obligation to maintain an honest link to the subject.

Certainly an artist is free to do whatever he/she wishes; art is not a courtroom. The final image is lovely. But I can't help feeling just a little bit misled by it.

Anyone else feel the same way? Or am I a deluded dinosaur? Have at it!

[LesPalenik]

The final image is lovely. But I can't help feeling just a little bit misled by it.

I agree with the first sentence. I don't feel misled, I feel elated by looking at the final version.
Peter created a beautiful image, and many thanks for taking us through the process and all the steps.
If I looked only at the original image, granted, there would be no deception, but it wouldn't evoke any strong feelings. Bored would be a better word.

We live in great times. Now we can choose betwen plain photos and beautiful pictures.

I predict, that whether we endorse or deride the creative moves as outlined here and in Alain's essay, it is the future of fine art photography. As others suggested, perhaps we'll need to establish a new nomenclature to categorize the photographs. It takes an artistic vision and technical competency to create pictures such as this one.

[petermfiore]

If the intent is to make ART, there are no rules. The image stands alone. How the image was made has nothing to do with it's value as a work of ART.

Peter

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Anyone else feel the same way?...

Yes.

[Ray]

What strikes me about this shot of the Sterling Ranges is the utter banality of the hill that has had enhanced lighting applied, presumably to make the scene more captivating.

I there was an old, dilapidated house on the hill, or a mob of kangaroos, or a group of Aboriginals decorated in war paint, holding spears, then there'd be a good reason to draw attention to the hill with that enhanced lighting.

As it is, our attention is drawn to mere grass on a foreground hill.

Nevertheless, the shapes are lovely. I'm reminded of pregnant women. Perhaps there's some symbolic significance here. Some people think Australia is underpopulated. 

[Peter Stacey]

Anyone else feel the same?

Not me.

At a different point in time, a break in cloud cover credibly result in a foreground highlight on the hill.

Knowing that Peter has created that point in time in post isn't a problem for me.

It would be great if like the studio, we could always have perfectly controlled and managed lighting in landscape photography. But I can appreciate that sometimes that control is going to be added in post because it rarely exists how we would absolutely want it at the time of capture.

[Tony Jay]

It seems as if some of the issues I raised in my thread may be replayed here.
As always it will be interesting to see how the debate develops.

Regards

Tony Jay

[Rob C]

Nevertheless, the shapes are lovely. I'm reminded of pregnant women. Perhaps there's some symbolic significance here. Some people think Australia is underpopulated.  

That's a good point, Ray, and I'm sure that that hillside would be conducive to many an impregnation were it free of spiders and snakes and such. I've never set foot there, and perhaps it is already free of said horrors, but my likelihood of contributing to the population growth is fairly low now - I have to conserve my energies for pushing the post-count... it's so important in the general scheme of things!

;-)

Rob C

P.S. Oh, I forgot: doesn't everybody already do that sort of thing with their pictures? Why else would you have PS, even if a lowly model 6?

[John R Smith]

I think Michael is just trying to wind us up with all this stuff . . .

  John

[Tony Jay]

Actually Rob, Australia is home to some particularly nasty creepy-crawlys including most of the top-twenty most poisonous snakes in the world, several particulary noxious spiders, not to mention the aggressive scorpions.

Nonetheless I still feel safer in places like this in Australia, despite the fact that Australian cities are very safe, as judged internationally.

Regards

Tony Jay

[Rob C]

Ah, Tony, the problem is that, unlike Ireland, Australia didn't have a St Patrick to send all the snakes across the waters - westwards, I'm told, to where they landed from the Staten Island Ferry and adopted blue uniforms. I, personally, am far more familiar with statins than Statens, so my geography might be a little off. However, had Astralia had such a saint, then eastwards would probably have made more sense.

Italy had a similar plague, but managed to export some key players to the same location from whence they, too, went westwards and founded Las Vegas. I wonder if the pink ranches have similar provenance?

All the Scots did was go away in all directions and create metal objects of great size. Oh, and banks.

Rob C

 

[HSway]

A creative use of an image. I have no problem with it although I don’t use it myself.

It illustrates a nice example of what’s being discussed in the other thread. This example of creative use is one of the best forms known to me. The elements within the photo are natural albeit the execution is very expressive.

Mind you, five times (or three) lesser the illumination effect on the rounded hill and this capture is actually ‘sometimes happening’ as the overall base is rather realistic.
I think the processing is well and quite precisely aimed move, including the degree of the pop, in consideration of the audience. Nice scene, highly expressive result of a present countryside.
Thanks for the nice article. I feel like being there. It will have to do with how I feel during my own processing.

Hynek

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... doesn't everybody already do that sort of thing with their pictures?...

Yes.

[Alan Smallbone]

I have no problem with it, I think the final image works and is well done. I also appreciate the time he took to detail the steps involved, a well done article. Thanks!

Alan

[theguywitha645d]

I am not really into imaginary landscapes, which is what that images is. This is the choice of the photographer. To call it nature photography would be how you interpret the nature photography. Personally, this is not really nature photography but an artificial construction.

Whatever blows your hair back. (I wonder how a jury would change their vote if they knew the process.)

[John Camp]

Anyone else feel the same way?

Yes.

[semillerimages]

Yes.

yes x2.

*steve

[Peter McLennan]

Certainly an artist is free to do whatever he/she wishes; art is not a courtroom. The final image is lovely. But I can't help feeling just a little bit misled by it.

Anyone else feel the same way? Or am I a deluded dinosaur? Have at it!

Yes.

No.

Far from being misled, I feel as if the landscape has been revealed.  Someone said something like "I feel like I was there"  There can be fewer compliments more valuable to a landscape artist. Photographer or otherwise.

[Guillermo Luijk]

Anyone else feel the same way?

Yes, I do.