Glencoe, Scotland

[dennbel]

Thanks Kevin.
BTW, I asked again only because I thought you may have not seen the original post since you had commented on something else later on. As far as being rude, I think Mr. Blagojevic is the one being "rude".

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

Thanks Kevin.
BTW, I asked again only because I thought you may have not seen the original post since you had commented on something else later on. As far as being rude, I think Mr. Blagojevic is the one being "rude".

The image was shot at a focal length of 35mm according to the meta data.

How to find this out for yourself on a Windoze machine at least - save the image to your desktop with a right click and then 'save as' etc, then right click the image in file view and select 'Properties' from the drop down menu that appears, now select the 'Details' tab in the dialogue box that opens up and look down the list to the 'Camera' section and for this particular image it says that the focal length was 35mm  

Kevin, welcome to Skye and yes the weather today was about as flat and overcast as it could possibly be and so it will be again tomorrow according to the weather forecast - so if that is the case and you and your people are stuck for something to do, then why not take them out for a nice hike out to Coral Beach to take some shots of the coral and pretty coloured shell details you will find there, it would be a nice day out in any weather and you can also visit and photograph Dunvegan Castle on your return and then finish off at Waternish for a sunset shoot and if there isn't going to be a sunset then there is a pub for you all to drown your sorrows with a few wee drams  

I am not saying Kevin's colour rendition of that particular shot of a well known Scottish landmark is correct or otherwise, but I will say in his defence, that you do indeed get some amazingly garish colours up here in autumn, especially the ferns as they are right now, which really do turn a sort of teeth grating carroty orange, much like the colour of the wigs that John refers to.

Dave

[dennbel]

Thanks for the tip but I believe that "35mm focal length" is referring to the 35mm equivalent and actually no info is present.

[Paulo Bizarro]

Of course, believability is important in a photograph. That doesn't mean it should be faithful or an accurate 2D reproduction of the original scene, but eventually manipulation (or a processing error) can compromise believability and produce something that's no longer a photograph. What is it? It depends - it might be a "graphic", illustration, photomontage etc - or a processing mistake.

B&W isn't a faithful or accurate reproduction of the landscape, but here it remains perfectly believable. What's your point?

My point is that what constitutes "believable" or "faithful" in a photo reproduction of a scene is entirely subjective. I have never been to Scotland, so I don't know what is, or is not, believable. But other posters have already stated that the photo reproduces what sometimes happens in that location in Autumn.

I was just contrasting "garish colours" vs. B&W, after all, both are valid artistic interpretations of a scene. Just because B&W has been around for 100 years, it does not make it more or less believable, or faithful, than overdone colour. We may be more used to it, but faithful it is not, for sure.

I guess some people around here do not like overdone colour, I like it (not always), when it suits the subject (in this case an autumnal Scottish landscape). 

[john beardsworth]

While there is lots of room for subjective judgement, "believable" or "faithful" is not entirely subjective - at the extreme it becomes substantially objective. But you just can't equate the B&W to the garish versions, Paulo. We believe the B&W image not because we are accustomed to accept B&W but because Kevin has produced greyscale tones which correspond to the ranges of brightness we expect in such scenes. He could easily have created a B&W version that was just as unbelievable as his garish colours.

And knowing Scotland and that type of terrain, I just roll my eyes in amazement at anyone claiming that picture reproduces what sometimes happens there. You just have to compare the garish image with the one Jeremy mentioned (4th one here) - its colours are a bit overdone, but they are roughly believable. And what's the key difference? It's that this other picture is sRGB tagged and has its colour profile intact. We've got to get away from excusing an simple post processing error with "valid artistic interpretation".

[jjj]

Thanks Kevin.
BTW, I asked again only because I thought you may have not seen the original post since you had commented on something else later on. As far as being rude, I think Mr. Blagojevic is the one being "rude".

I blocked his posts some time back as he's possibly the rudest, nastiest person that's ever posted on LuLa.  Along with some very morally questionable stuff he has posted, I find his continued presence here baffling when others have been censured for far, far less.

[jjj]

I was just contrasting "garish colours" vs. B&W, after all, both are valid artistic interpretations of a scene. Just because B&W has been around for 100 years, it does not make it more or less believable, or faithful, than overdone colour. We may be more used to it, but faithful it is not, for sure.

Absolutely. This is a pet peeve of mine particularly in photojournalism where reducing or boosting colour slightly will get all kinds of hate directed at you for altering reality, yet B+W which is nothing at all like reality is apparently perfectly OK for depicting news stories.

I guess some people around here do not like overdone colour, I like it (not always), when it suits the subject (in this case an autumnal Scottish landscape). 

It's personal taste really, though in the case of this shot, the sky being more cyan than blue is the thing that looks 'wrong' to me. If shot is meant to be 'realistic' that is. If not, that's fine if it pleases the photographer.

[stamper]

While there is lots of room for subjective judgement, "believable" or "faithful" is not entirely subjective - at the extreme it becomes substantially objective. But you just can't equate the B&W to the garish versions, Paulo. We believe the B&W image not because we are accustomed to accept B&W but because Kevin has produced greyscale tones which correspond to the ranges of brightness we expect in such scenes. He could easily have created a B&W version that was just as unbelievable as his garish colours.

And knowing Scotland and that type of terrain, I just roll my eyes in amazement at anyone claiming that picture reproduces what sometimes happens there. You just have to compare the garish image with the one Jeremy mentioned (4th one here) - its colours are a bit overdone, but they are roughly believable. And what's the key difference? It's that this other picture is sRGB tagged and has its colour profile intact. We've got to get away from excusing an simple post processing error with "valid artistic interpretation".

While there is lots of room for subjective judgement, "believable" or "faithful" is not entirely subjective - at the extreme it becomes substantially objective. But you just can't equate the B&W to the garish versions, Paulo. We believe the B&W image not because we are accustomed to accept B&W but because Kevin has produced greyscale tones which correspond to the ranges of brightness we expect in such scenes. He could easily have created a B&W version that was just as unbelievable as his garish colours.

quote Dave

I am not saying Kevin's colour rendition of that particular shot of a well known Scottish landmark is correct or otherwise, but I will say in his defence, that you do indeed get some amazingly garish colours up here in autumn, especially the ferns as they are right now, which really do turn a sort of teeth grating carroty orange, much like the colour of the wigs that John refers to.

Dave

I think Dave's judgement is more reliable? He lives in the area Kevin was shooting.

[john beardsworth]

Well, Dave lives on the island of Skye, not Glencoe, and in the highlands each glen has its own micro-climate. From what attention I pay to Scotland's weather, this year one does expect richer autumn colours and maybe some new growth. You see that reflected in the other photographer's pictures, but a simple post processing mistake has made Kevin's version unbelievable.

[jeremyrh]

Note that these photos were taken in 2012. Maybe the bracken was orange that autumn, but I doubt it was the same orange as the trees and the heather. And the rocks for that matter.

[john beardsworth]

Note that these photos were taken in 2012. Maybe the bracken was orange that autumn, but I doubt it was the same orange as the trees and the heather. And the rocks for that matter.

Thanks for that important correction!  I was looking at the picture - not the big white text beneath it

[jjj]

I am not saying Kevin's colour rendition of that particular shot of a well known Scottish landmark is correct or otherwise, but I will say in his defence, that you do indeed get some amazingly garish colours up here in autumn, especially the ferns as they are right now, which really do turn a sort of teeth grating carroty orange, much like the colour of the wigs that John refers to.

One of our Acers goes from green to leafless within a week with a few transitional days of luminous/garish orange.
.

[jeremyrh]

One of our Acers goes from green to leafless within a week with a few transitional days of luminous/garish orange.
.

The stuff you learn on LuLa 

[stamper]

Thanks for that important correction!  I was looking at the picture - not the big white text beneath it

Note that these photos were taken in 2012. Maybe the bracken was orange that autumn, but I doubt it was the same orange as the trees and the heather. And the rocks for that matter.
[/quote

So unless you were there you can't be certain? Therefore Kevin should get the benefit of doubt....assuming you aren't doubting his honesty?

[jeremyrh]

I hadn't realised that this is a court of law. But if you insist ...

I have 2 photos of what I am assuming to be the same scene, taken within minutes of each other.
I have visited this area on countless occasions and have a general idea what to expect.
One of the pictures depicts a scene that is in accord with my expectations.
The other picture depicts a scene that grossly violates my expectations, with regard to the colour of the vegetation, the rocks and the sky.
The latter photograph is made by a person with a known predilection for driving with his foot on the saturation pedal.

My conclusion is that Kevin's photo is unrealistic. I am not making a moral judgement, or questioning his honesty. Kevin can create, enjoy, and post whatever pictures he pleases - it's his site, after all.

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

"With respect to the requirement of art, the probable impossible is always preferable to the improbable possible."

and

"Poetry does not tolerate the improbable, but can tolerate the impossible, provided the impossible is also believable."

Aristotle

Dave 

[john beardsworth]

No one's doubting Kevin's honesty (you're the one who mentioned it, Stamper) and I'm not questioning his artistic judgement. Just how hard is it to understand the colours are unbelievable not because of creative choices or nature - but because of a simple post processing error?

[Kevin Raber]

I'll tell you what.  When I get back from the damp and wet Scotland trip I am presently on I will pull the original raw and do a small article on it.  The image I used was tiff file I made a while back.  Let's look at the file and see where the color really was. Yes, I do saturate sometimes but my recollection is that this scene didn't need much saturation.  I opened the shadows in the rocks and foreground.  Let's all take a step back and I'll be happy to go to the original RAW and go from there.  So, be patient for a week or so until I get back. I can tell you though the color was pretty overwhelming.

I am sitting with Joe Cornish and Steve Gosling who are well known for photography in this region.  Their feeling is that the yellows are acurate but maybe the way I opened the shadows is causing some illusion. Their suggestions is to pull the saturation in the shadows.  But the garish yellow everyone is claiming to be inaccurate is looking correct based on bright sun and the time of year it was shot.

So, I will revisit this and ask Joe and Steve to contribute to the article with me.  As they both tell me, here in Scotland color and light go from one extreme to the other.  I will ask each of them to process the same file in their way. 

How about that as an idea?

Kevin

[jeremyrh]

Sounds like a great idea, Kevin. That will be very instructive - thanks.

[Dave (Isle of Skye)]

But doesn't Steve Goslin mainly go for the really dark mono grungy look and Joe Cornish is/was an ardent fan of the super saturated velvia colour film look? - Hmm, could be an interesting article about the appropriate use of colour in photography methinks    I am not against either of their styles or work BTW, just wondering how their processing methods would fit into a discussion about colour correction?

Looking out of my window in Kyleakin (Skye) right now at the weather you guys are having to work under today and I am not envious, not envious at all, it is truly atrocious out there. Sorry Skye is being so cruel to you all, but hey, that is what Scotland is all about, active weather and stunning scenery, trouble is, when you get too much active weather, you can't actually see any of the stunning scenery - but I do wish you all the best of luck guys for the rest of your stay and that things do get better for you and as I said in my earlier post above, a few wee drams in the pub tonight might help the situation  

Dave