Hidden Gems
by Tony Kuyper
After photographing burnt trees a few times this particular morning, I could see that the camera was picking up colors reflecting from the surrounding forest and clear sky that I really wasn't seeing when I looked at the charred wood. It reminded me a bit of sandstone in this regard, so I figured it might develop out similarly.
This was the only comp that displayed this mosaic of colors when I upped the saturation. It sort of reminded me of the the polished inlay jewelry fashioned by the Hopis and other pueblo tribes in the Southwest.
Large and selective saturation increases were used to produce this effect. The straight RAW conversion is below. The RAW image does show inklings of these colors, but there's little question this has been pushed a bit beyond "real" . . . but hopefully not beyond believable.
Your thoughts and suggests are always appreciated.
Canon 5D2, 28-300@92mm, f/16, 1/4 sec, ISO 400
Comments
24 commentsI like the subtle silver and muted color a lot.
Nice eye for this....
D&L
I think the raw file with a nice S curve would yield some stunning results, too.
And maybe I should clarify "believable." It doesn't mean that you believe you could actually see this were you standing there. I already said this is not what I saw, but what the camera saw. "Believable" is used in the sense that these colors are natural in this setting. The greens are reflected from the surrounding forest, the blues are reflected from the open sky, and the reds and yellows are inherent in the deeper, unburned wood. By bringing out natural colors I feel there is a believability in the results that would be missing were the colors transformed into something like purple and pink . . . or over-saturated.
I don't know what "believable" means in this context. How believable is any two dimensional electronic representation of a four dimensional human experience? (smile) When I saw the image, I immediately recognized it as an image of a charred tree trunk. It's certainly believable in that sense. It's also believable to me in the same sense that my favorite black and white images are believable.
I like the first image a lot and I also like the second because of the comp and textures. If I had a choice as to which one to frame and hang on my wall for daily viewing, it would certainly be the first though.
pat
I also have a difference in the way I define believable. To me, believable means that I stand a reasonable chance of seeing those colors when I am out in the field. It does not mean to ME that traces of those colors are picked up by film or a sensor and then saturated to make them very visible. To me, your image is not believable by my definition, but that has no bearing on its artistic merits.
I don't always go with believable in my own work. As Pat points out, B&W is not a representation of reality (or therefore believable), but I still shoot B&W film and convert color files to B&W.
I consider our differences in opinions to be healthy. It means we present very different artistic interpretations in the presentation of our work. Neither of us are interested in literal views of scenes we photograph. We just take our images in different directions.
So hopefully I have not offended you, but if I did, my apologies.
Cheers,
Harley
Nick Bristol
Lone Rock, WI
I have photographed a lot of char, and like you I can see the color of the surrounding environment reflected in the sheen when I'm in the field. However, I prefer a more understated look. I do like the composition of your image.
--P
1.) It is visually stunning to take in with the array of colors and lines.
2.)This is sparks healthy ideas and discussion on what photography is to the individual artist, and I think that it is wonderful to discuss different points of view, and understand where the other is coming from.
3.) This image shows what is possible in a world of light, and thank you for your vision Tony!!