NikonGear'23
Images => Critique => Topic started by: simato73 on June 15, 2016, 23:04:11
-
I'd like some comments on three versions of a picture I took at the NG trip to Lofoten in 2010.
The image shows some peaks on the northwestern side of Reinefjord, with Hermansdaltindan in the back.
I keep going back to this image and have come to the conclusion that I would like to print it, but am not sure whether I want a colour version, B&W or somewhere in between (leaving only the colour in the clouds). I haven't decided the size either.
I'll probably start printing all of them smallish, but would also like to know what others think, so please give me your opinions.
-
Perhaps a hybrid blend between #1 and #2 would be worth while investigating further?
-
My immediate thoughts was also like Birnas..
To my eye the b/w shot could benefit from some more tonal contrast (is that the correct term?) in the rocks and a bit in the sky. But that's to my eye..
I like the composition and colors - great shot.
-
To me, the color version is easily the better choice. I like the first image. The darker rendition of the mountains carries more of a majestic feel. Maybe I would like to raise the saturation to enhance the dawn (dusk?) color, if possible.
Also, maybe I would try to cut the bottom 15-20% of the frame to get the horizontal panorama effect. In this particular case, the foreground at the very bottom is not absolutely effective to me.
The (final) print size? The larger the better! :D
-
Simone, a really nice picture of these mighty mountains. I like the mood. My immediate thoughts was also like Birnas and Lars, and a tiny cut at the bottom to "clean up" the composition. A big print will look awesome on your wall. :)
-
Simone, impressive!
I would go for #2.
-
Thank you all for the comments.
I'll let my brain process them during my sleep and will work on them tomorrow.
-
Simone, I like the second. I particularly like the differentiation of tones among the clouds. They are a bit more compressed in the first. The bright patch of sky at right, beneath the clouds, is also a little more burned out in the first (may be exacerbated by the jpeg conversion for display here). I also like to see into the shaded, darker tones of landscapes, and often process to lift and separate the darker levels. That can lead to lower contrast overall, which I don't mind, but is not to everyone's taste. Cropping to a more panoramic aspect ratio might emphasise the horizontal elements in the sky, but my preference would be only to trim a little off the bottom. The mountains stand tall, and some of that is lost for me when I look at the picture with their feet chopped off. See what you think. Beautiful image. Print large!
-
I'd like a blend of 1 and 2. I like the details of the peaks in 2, but it overpowers the colors above a bit.
-
for me version 1 with more detail in the peaks - so I guess I am also saying a blend.
the B&W doesnt work for me
lovely image by the way
-
A beautiful image, for sure.
I can understand the versions you present, and agree with Elsa, for me the B&W is, when you know the fine colours of the sunset not the preferable option.
Agree with Akira on the first version and the possibilities he presents as this comes close, to my idea, to the natural situation.
-
I have to agree with Akira on the cropping, would definitely feel more suitable.
-
Not able to work on the image now since I am at work, but I am convinced that the colour in the sky istoo interesting to turn it into monochrome.
Therefore I am leaning towards a mix of 1 and 2.
In terms of composition I am not sure if a pano format would work, but I'll give it a try. I was actually quite deliberate in putting that thin slice of foreground, to me it adds some sense of depth and helps anchor the image. Trying another crop won't hurt though.
-
I think the shadow contrast is better in the second, but personally I would not desaturate the shadows. If you blend the second image as a luminosity mask you may get the best of both.
But how it will look in the print also depends on a lot of factors, among them is the material on which it is printed. Maybe an aluminium print might look good. It might require a few test prints (or a very experienced printer) to get the shadow details right. Soft proofing can be a starting point if you don't have the means to do test prints.
-
1 and 2 blend ++
I like the soft contrast of the clouds in 1
and the details of the mountains in 2
I like the crop as is
-
Two further versions.
Both are a mix of 1 and 2 (original set) in terms of colour; the second has a more panoramic crop as suggested by some.
-
Lovely!
[We need another meet-up in Lofoten!]
-
Lovely!
[We need another meet-up in Lofoten!]
Thank you!
What do you think of the various versions?
[I wholeheartedly agree]
-
Both looks nice. How large are you going to print? I wouldn't say the foreground is meaningless (in general, I like and appreciate your photographic taste), but I would think that you would need to print REALLY HUGE for the foreground to be effective. Otherwise I would go for the pano framing. I admit that the original framing feels more dynamic, though.
-
Both looks nice. How large are you going to print? I wouldn't say the foreground is meaningless (in general, I like and appreciate your photographic taste), but I would think that you would need to print REALLY HUGE for the foreground to be effective. Otherwise I would go for the pano framing. I admit that the original framing feels more dynamic, though.
I am probably going to print 12"x18" because I have a spare frame for that size but if the file is good enough I could print up to 16"x24" (original crop)
-
Although I have a fondness for pano compositions, the sky seems somehow "bigger" in the non-pano version. Maybe because more of the mountain is shown? So I like best the first photo just above (post at 11:58:53). Bringing out some light on the mountain sides worked well. Now we can see just how rugged and steep they are.
But pick the one you feel to print. It will be a nice print.
-
Although I have a fondness for pano compositions, the sky seems somehow "bigger" in the non-pano version. Maybe because more of the mountain is shown? So I like best the first photo just above (post at 11:58:53). Bringing out some light on the mountain sides worked well. Now we can see just how rugged and steep they are.
But pick the one you feel to print. It will be a nice print.
Oh, I didn't notice the sky was also cut for the pano version. I suggested to cut the bottom (the foreground) only. I would like the sky remaining as original. I think my use of the word "pano" caused some confusion. Sorry.