Sunday, February 04, 2007
Glen Beag
I'm not sure what the local word is for this, but I'm standing in what Cumbrians would call an intake. That is an upland stone enclosure for the temporary holding of sheep.
I've done rather more manipulation on this photo than I'm accustomed to doing, so any comments on the naturalness or otherwise of the result would be appreciated.
Permalink / posted by and copyright of Colin [auspiciousdragon.net] : 10:59 AM
Comments:
At a guess you were trying to pull out the purple blushes of the birch (echoed a little bit in one of the stones on the left). You might also have been reducing shadow in the foreground. The trees look OK but there is a slightly flat look overall and the composition doesn't help alleviate that. Despite a half-ellipse of trees at the top of the hill there isn't anything that defines the hill apart from to say that it was a dull day! More part of a portfolio.
The sheep enclosure is in the same state of repair as many one sees around the UK in the uplands - old bits of wire to make up for missing stones. At least we can say what we might feel as sheep were we to be let out of this place!
It is the flatness of lighting that I recognised as the cause of many a 'failed' image of mine. I confess to taking pictures in this lighting but rarely attempting to retrieve them once on the HD. If I were to have a go I would adjust levels, curves and saturation. Subtle saturation can put back a bit of 'life' but over-doing it is easy and produces a 'not real' look.
The composition seems a bit weak to me, a lighting contrast between foreground and background would have helped.
I went to a lecture by Ken Scott, a landscape photographer. He specialises in making the 'light' the subject. His website is HERE. I enjoyed his lecture. There was a bit of fun as the hall suffered a power cut before we started so I ran the projector from a 300W inverter in the boot of my car!
It looks fairly natural to me; I'd be hard pressed to say what's been manipulated.
What were you going for in this photo?
I agree with matt here. The scene looks very natural and I wouldn't have guessed that much had been done with it. The composition doesn;t really grab me though there is a slight sensation of being drawn into the scene due primarily to the incline and the layering of the area behind the gates and the steep incline at the rear.
The foreground is great. It nicely borders the image and then leads my eye through the missing gate to...
...to nothing. I'm sorry but there is nothing in the background that is keeping my interest.
Ken Scott uses a Pentax ME Super. I'm trading in a couple of old Canon FD lenses to get one...
Thanks to all for the comments. I owe a little bit of explanation I think.
Firstly the processing....
During conversion I desaturated a bit. This may be a technicality as most people say that the currently available M8 profiles are too rich. Then in Photoshop I took a little out of the reds. The bracken was wet and much too rich looking for the time of year (winter, what winter?). After that it gets more interesting. I took lots of the Cyan and Green out. I am constantly amazed at how little Photoshop green there is in mossy grass. I did this because the shadows caused by the wall and the lichens on the wall appeared to have a colour cast (whereas in fact they were accurately recorded). I was afraid that I had taken this too far.
Then, in Lightzone I compressed the contrast in the background hill without affecting the stonework (i.e. roughly what Rex suggested, but in reverse!). The background is fully out of focus (not so evident in the web sized version) and I wanted to de-emphasise it further.
All of which is more processing than I might do on twenty other photos put together.
And now to why....
I think Guy and JohnJo got it, even though they weren't attracted to the photo. This is a deliberate attempt to lead you out of the gate and get you to go for a walk.
A theme of quite a lot of my landscape shots is 'the landscape begins at your feet' (I'm sure there is a more elegant way of putting that). I've had a number of non-photographer friends select an image because it makes them feel 'there' and involved with the land. It started off less consciously done, and I was experimenting with whether I could achieve the effect deliberately without it showing too heavy a hand. It worked for Christian (the only person to have seen a real print of this), but then she knew the question in advance.
Sorry for the essay! And thanks again for the consideration given.
Post a Comment
The sheep enclosure is in the same state of repair as many one sees around the UK in the uplands - old bits of wire to make up for missing stones. At least we can say what we might feel as sheep were we to be let out of this place!
The composition seems a bit weak to me, a lighting contrast between foreground and background would have helped.
What were you going for in this photo?
...to nothing. I'm sorry but there is nothing in the background that is keeping my interest.
Ken Scott uses a Pentax ME Super. I'm trading in a couple of old Canon FD lenses to get one...
Firstly the processing....
During conversion I desaturated a bit. This may be a technicality as most people say that the currently available M8 profiles are too rich. Then in Photoshop I took a little out of the reds. The bracken was wet and much too rich looking for the time of year (winter, what winter?). After that it gets more interesting. I took lots of the Cyan and Green out. I am constantly amazed at how little Photoshop green there is in mossy grass. I did this because the shadows caused by the wall and the lichens on the wall appeared to have a colour cast (whereas in fact they were accurately recorded). I was afraid that I had taken this too far.
Then, in Lightzone I compressed the contrast in the background hill without affecting the stonework (i.e. roughly what Rex suggested, but in reverse!). The background is fully out of focus (not so evident in the web sized version) and I wanted to de-emphasise it further.
All of which is more processing than I might do on twenty other photos put together.
And now to why....
I think Guy and JohnJo got it, even though they weren't attracted to the photo. This is a deliberate attempt to lead you out of the gate and get you to go for a walk.
A theme of quite a lot of my landscape shots is 'the landscape begins at your feet' (I'm sure there is a more elegant way of putting that). I've had a number of non-photographer friends select an image because it makes them feel 'there' and involved with the land. It started off less consciously done, and I was experimenting with whether I could achieve the effect deliberately without it showing too heavy a hand. It worked for Christian (the only person to have seen a real print of this), but then she knew the question in advance.
Sorry for the essay! And thanks again for the consideration given.