Delicate Arch Wide View

Gallery: LandscapePosted December 2, 2012960 views6 comments

I went up for sunset and got up to the arch early so I decided to explore the area around the arch and ended up 'behind' the arch. I like the different viewpoint showing the cliff and the sense of scale it imparts. The skies were mostly overcast with no great color on the sandstone so I did a B&W conversion. The two black specks just to the left of the arch are people, for a sense of scale. I didn't put this in Man and Nature because they really aren't identifiable, but if the moderators think it should be moved that is fine. I'd appreciate any critiques you may have on the image, thank you!

Canon 1DS II, 17-40 lens @23mm, f6.3, 1/100sec, ISO200

Comments

6 comments

Comment posted by Nancy Lea Sandy on December 2, 2012 at 11:03 PM

A bit different take on this location. I like the generous curves of sandstone and the details on the cliff face. I also like that the arch, itself, is just another element in a fascinating landscape. Very nice work on this one

Registered on January 24, 2011, 576 Posts, 6942 Comments

Comment posted by Stan Rose on December 3, 2012 at 12:10 AM

I applaud the creativity! Overall, not a bad effort, but im not completely sold on the comp; the lack of light/shadow makes it a bit flat overall, which sort of defeats the whole idea of giving perspective. I also think it might have been stronger with a little more bg separation for the arch--although i know that would have been tricky. It's a keeper, but not one of your better shots.

Registered on September 15, 2005, 836 Posts, 17099 Comments

Comment posted by Lon Overacker on December 3, 2012 at 3:04 AM

Scott,

Certainly a new and different take on this popular location. I think this is very effective and turned out great! The sky is especially complimentary and I think the arch stands out well enough. Then again, it may stand out only for those of us who have seen tons of images from here? Just sayin'.... I also think the b&w was a good and effective choice here, nice job with the processing.

Regarding the people, thanks for the mention. By mentioning the people, you've pre-empted any thought of moving this (speaking only as 1 moderator, not all.) What I mean is that, you are correct in quoting the guidelines of "recognizable." True the people are not recognizable and could be rocks for all we know - although we all know they're not rocks....

But to use them for "scale" you acknowledge the hand of man. If they're just rocks, then I'd clone them out cause the rocks wouldn't provide any scale....

Don't take that too seriously Scott, I'm not bothered in the least. You threw me a bone though.

Nice work, kudos for seeking out something different.

Lon

Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments

Comment posted by Morris McClung on December 3, 2012 at 12:27 PM

An excellent different take on this place, Scott. And, the conversion tones just add to it's uniqueness. Well done!

Registered on May 7, 2007, 670 Posts, 19650 Comments

Comment posted by Mark Metternich on December 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Love the totally different take of the area!

Registered on June 19, 2009, 276 Posts, 6240 Comments

Comment posted by Mark Pelton on December 3, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I like the image, but I would prefer more of a traditional B&W over the sepia toning.

Registered on November 25, 2003, 380 Posts, 4647 Comments