Landscapes - The wider view of things...

[ShaneS]

Like Christina I too am trying to improve upon my landscape photography and hope that you will take the time to share your thoughts and provide some C&C on these images that I captured this weekend at a local marsh.

Although I was up and out with the sun I had to wait for the sun to clear the mountains and then patiently wait for passing clouds to clear between shots. These are all basically the same scene with different compositions and I think that I also have some PP issues.

The first shot required me to merged two exposures - one for the sky and one for the foreground as none looked at I saw it otherwise. Even the polarizer which I am still learning to use didn't seem to help. It was 7:44AM and the foreground was fairly dark (see above) with a bright sky. I feel like the background of the image looks too much like a painting to me and am wondering if you agree and, if so, how I could have processed it differently.



The next two shots are of the same scene with different orientations and were taken about 45 minutes later - The sun was above the mountains behind me and all I had to do was wait for clouds to clear the sun. The foreground reflections caught my eye on these shots but again I think that I may have overdone the contrast (?) in PP.

First the portrait orientation:



Lastly, an image of the Koolau Mountains with greenery in the forefront that caught my eye due to the symmetry in shape with the mountain in the background. Not sure if this is an effective composition or not?

Next, the wider view:



Lastly, an image of the Koolau Mountains with greenery in the forefront that caught my eye due to the symmetry in shape with the mountain in the background. Not sure if this is an effective composition or not?



So, what do you think about composition, PP, etc? Your thoughts, opinions and suggestions for improvement are always appreciated.

[Donald]

Just a very quick, first reaction as I get ready to get out the door on my way to work.

The first one stopped me in my tracks. That's always a good sign. I think it's a very lovely image. The composition is great.

And it serves to illustrate why I think the other three, good images thought they are, don't work so well in compositional terms. The reason, for me, is that the other three have very bland, less interesting foregrounds. There's not a lot of variety in terms of tone and shapes, whereas with the first one there is lots to look at in the whole image, from the immediate foreground, through the middle ground and into the back ground. I think it's a beauty.

It also shows the importance of being dedicated to the task by getting up and being there for the early sun. The light on it is gorgeous.

[Clive Kirby]

Shane
I think I disagree with Donald, only in as much as which images I like.

Although I can't criticise composition, processing etc on any of the images, all four are good, the first does very little for me, I find myself looking around the image for something to latch onto.

The other three I like. I think I prefer the simpler foreground of the water and the fact it reflects the other elements of the image. The thing that strikes me about the last image is the way the line of the mountains copies the tree line - they do say simple things for simple minds!! (I'm referring to my mind - not yours or Donalds),

I do think it is interesting that two people can view the same thing and come up with opposite opinions.
regards
Clive

[IzzieK]

I have to open two side by side windows in this so I can go back and forth to comment easily, so here goes:

#1 -- I think lesser foreground is needed here. It certainly needed a bit more sky...the PP is nicely done though...love the colours.
#2 and #3 -- I love the wider view better. Again the sky is too thin at the top of #2. Being the person that I am raised in a farm, a wide open space, my personality is that I like wider spaces around me. City life is too claustrophobic for me, hence I like longer and wider view and feel of a space -- sky, skies...other views may vary according to their taste and feel.
#4 I am not too keen on that one. Sorry. I don't feel anything at all that attracts me to it.

[Shadowman]

Very nice images.

[Stagecoach]

Hi Shane,

The vegetation and greens bear a striking resemblance to what we have here in Fiji. Regarding composition, I'm not too good a judge on that but have found I have a preference with many scenes such as these to have something in the foreground that helps to emphasise the depth.

You have certainly chosen some good lighting but I wonder if the yellow wants toning done just the slightest smidgen?

As for No 1 if you are talking about the the sunlit mountain being the background I wonder if the mid to foreground being toned down slightly may help.

Oh yes, DoF and sharpness throughout spot on.

Grahame

[bnnrcn]

I go for #3 because it shows a wider area if you compare to #2 and#4 and composition is very nice with the reflecting water in front ..#2 and #4 are also seem too tight to me as landscape pictures.I like #1 too but it looks like a postcard with the plants in front although experts say some objects in front give depth to the picture.So my best is #3,it is nice and natural.By the way I'm very new in photography and I act with my feelings rather than rules of photography:-)

[Brownbear]

Hi Shane,

Thanks for sharing... I'm still learning so just sharing my thoughts

I think the first image is stunningly beautiful. Truly gorgeous, so sharp, beautiful light and wonderfully composed. If I were to change anything I might take a little bit off of the bottom or lighten the bottom.

None of the images look too contrasty to me.

I also adore #2 & #3, and I especially like the portrait orientation of the 2nd image.

#4 is just okay for me... the clouds are lovely but the light isn't as beautiful as in the first images, where the mountain view is so beautiful and special.

[Kyle]

Amazing shots. All of them are great but I have to say the first one is really outstanding.

[kaneohebud]

Aloha Shane:
I like the first three the most. The composition works on all. The only challenge I see in all of them is the washed out sky and lack of cloud definition. This can be remedied by use of a GND filter while shooting or by applying in PP with NIK software. Keep on shooting!

[mknittle]

They are all good images but #1 is a great image. nice work Shane

[ShaneS]

I'm at work at the moment but am appreciative all of your comments so far and plan on making a more detailed response after work...Oh, the things that we 'have' to do to support our hobby

After a quick read through I think that there are some things I can address in editing and it will be a good exercise for comparison and general learning purposes.

Thanks everyone! Keep the comments coming

[ShaneS]

Now that I have had a chance to absorb your thoughtful replies I have made some edits to image#1 and #3 that I hope represent some improvement. You be the judge...

First, image#1 seemed to be a favorite (thank you for that as it was quite unexpected ) and I have only made minor edits which include adding a gradient to the sky which I think enhances the clouds and the lighting on the mountain in the background. I also did some dodging and burning in the foreground to tone it down a bit per some suggestions. I'm really not sure about this edit and think that maybe it needed to be even more subtle.



Next, I took another look at the third image and made some more drastic changes in both the editing and aspect ratio. It is now wider for Izzie and I added a polarizing effect in NIK which enhances the overall lighting, the clouds and the reflection. Again I did a bit of dodging and burning throughout.



Izzie, from my vantage point I couldn't get anymore sky unless I brought along a step ladder as I was at the bottom of a marsh. The only other option would be to shoot in an upwards direction and I didn't think that it would work in this situation but I will think about it the next time I am out. Thanks for the suggestion.

Grahame, yes, I do see a lot of similarities with your Fiji landscape and ours. This area is very interesting as it is being reclaimed as a marsh by volunteers (it was once a sacred place to the Hawaiian people and house the chiefs, fish ponds and other agriculture). In the left foreground of the first image is a taro patch. I tried to tone down the yellows per your suggestion but it made the foreground darker (which Christina suggested) and I'm not sure if dodging was the right technique here?

I want to thank everyone for taking the time to comment and for helping me to continue to learn and improve through your critiques.

[Mike Buckley]

I'm glad to see the two revised versions because those are my two favorites. Try backing off on the intensity of the reflection in the last one, as it seems a bit much considering the source tonalities of the sky.

I think the composition in the first one is ideal, not too much foreground and not too little sky.

You mentioned that the polarizer didn't have much effect on the sky in the first image. Considering that the sky is cloudy, I wouldn't expect it to. However, if there was some glare on the leaves of foliage and grass, the polarizer very nicely eliminated it.

When I think of Hawaii, I think of lush green tones. I'm not sure you can consistently and easily get that effect without using the polarizer to eliminate the glare.

[IzzieK]

Thank you, Shane. Love it! Love both of them!

[Brownbear]

Gorgeous! I loved the first images but your edits are perfection (to me). Please keep sharing your landscapes like this. Very helpful.

[FrankMi]

Hi Shane, when I first opened this thread and saw the top 2/3d's of the first image I thought 'WOW', this is great! As I scrolled down and saw the entire image I felt it had diminished a bit from the peak. I think for me it is the 4:3 aspect ratio that just doesn't seem to fit an epic mountain scene. It's a bit like the opening of a movie on the old 4:3 TV as opposed to the same movie being shown in the 16:9 Widescreen format. It feels like something is missing and lacks punch.

But wait a minute! The image is still there! It hasn't changed. You have sufficient foreground interesting detail in that first image, perhaps even too much. I would try cropping about half of the foreground detail and seeing how the image feels to you in a 16:9 aspect ratio using the updated copy of that image.

I get the same feeling with the third shot but cropping is not a practical solution without loosing all of the water and the benefit of it's reflection. You would not get the same feeling if you were to clip the reflection. I think Izzie has the right idea and given that there is nothing in this scene that would look abnormal if it were stretched even wider, I would definitely experiment with seeing if you can get the revised #3 image wider still.

In the end, it is your sense of what feels right to you that matters so I certainly won't be concerned if you prefer narrower landscape images, but for me, the widescreen 'feel' just seems to be more natural.

Hope this helps!

[Mike Buckley]

Frank's post provided the only encouragement I needed to revisit the revised first photo and I see two new possibilities: One possibility is to crop at the bottom to eliminate all of the present foreground information. Another possibility is to crop at the right to make a square format. Doing so positions the tall foreground plant on the right side, which eliminates the static feeling I get from that plant being practically dead center.

[AndrewMcD]

I particularly like #1, I feel I could step right into the scene.

I like the way the vegetation mimics the shape of the mountain in #4.

I wonder if #2 and #3 would be better without the water. If the water surface were mirror smooth I think it might work; as it is, there is something unsettling to my eye.

With regard to your comment that the background looks like a painting in #1; I don't think that is a bad thing here. There is plenty of interesting sharp detail in the fore and mid areas.....the background is a bit of icing on the cake.
Andrew

[ShaneS]

Here we go again...but before I post two new versions I want to say that this thread has opened my eyes to new PP techniques and new ways to compose/frame an image and I want to send out a sincere mahalo (thank you) to everyone who gave me some 'food for thought'!

I know that I will be going out to this area again and will be able to see it differently in some respects next time as a result of this thread. I also know that I can use what I have learned through this thread for other scenes as well

On to the edits...I went back to my first image SOOC to see if it would work in a 16:9 ratio per Frank's suggestion but I was unable to remove all of the tall foreground plant which then became a distraction with only a bit showing at the bottom of the frame. But, I will show you the square crop per Mike's suggestion which I think really enhanced the hint of a trail in the left middle ground that helps lead the eye to the background mountain. I'm not sure which I like better as in my mind they are now very different images.



Mike's next suggestion to tone down the reflection in the second revised image was a PP challenge for me...it may sound easy but it took me a while and this is what I came up with:



If you aren't sick of this scene yet and have something to add to the thread feel free to do so...