Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.
Yosemite Autumn +RP
‹ PreviousLandscape GalleryNext ›

Yosemite Autumn +RP

by Lon Overacker

Gallery: LandscapePosted November 21, 2015230 views19 comments
Thank you everyone for your comment on previous images.

Any suggestions on a title would be appreciated.  Kinda drawing a blank on this one.

This is a retake on a scene I photographed 3 years ago.  Now that I have a DSLR, one the things I'm doing now is to potentially re-shoot some of my favorite scenes.  This is one of those.  Here is my 4x5 version from 2012.  I look back now at this one and think, "yikes, the saturation and red is killing me!"  At least to my eye, I think the previous version is over saturated. So now how can I really compare?  Processing is key to how well our images are perceived.  Also, the conditions aren't the same between captures, growth, amount of color, fewer leaves, etc.  I guess maybe I have less to learn and less to prove by making such comparisons.

This was captured in an area not far from the Ahwahnee Meadow where there used to be a campground.  It was washed away in the 1997 flood and Park management decided to let it return to it's natural state.

So, your comments, critiques and suggestions on current history will be appreciated!

Nikon D800E
Tamron 24-135mm @60mm f/16
3-image focus stack
Tony Kuyper's Luminosity and saturation masks

Comments

19 comments
Comment posted by Preston Birdwell on November 21, 2015 at 2:54 PM
This has a wonderful mood to it, and the composition is right on. If I recall correctly, the first image you made here on 4x5 was made on a cloudy day, and I really liked what you did then. I do think the color in this version is superior. I like the combination of maple cedar and ponderosa pines.

I used to camp in this campground back in the 1970's. It was called Upper River, then. I am glad the NPS decided to allow this area, and the other campground that was across the road, to return to their natural state.

My images from this area this trip went into the digital dustbin. I am glad you got this exceptionally fine one!

--P
Registered on November 1, 2003, 471 Posts, 5188 Comments
Comment posted by Harley Goldman on November 21, 2015 at 3:15 PM
Real nice, Lon. I prefer the colors in this one. The older one is saturated and red. I think you could warm this one up a touch for my tastes, but then nobody ever said I had taste. Nice work. 
Registered on November 19, 2003, 586 Posts, 11271 Comments
Comment posted by David Schoen on November 21, 2015 at 3:45 PM
The colors seem more natural in the DSLR image.  The focus stack also gives a different level of sharpness which in my eye slightly alters the depth perception.  POV is a little different in the 4x5 image. Far BG is way sharper in newer image which may be reason for depth perception interpretation.  Nice job.
Registered on November 6, 2006, 1213 Posts, 4587 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on November 21, 2015 at 4:25 PM
Good call on the color Harley.  I did feel it was a little cold - almost too digital? if that makes sense.  I tweaked this one and like it much better. I bumped up the saturation and red a tad, but also completely desaturated the blue.  Also added an 81 filter, but then masked out granite in the background.  One of problems while processing this image was keeping the color of the granite real to my eye.  In most cases, and even applying the 81, it made the granite too much towards red. So I painted the effects out.  Overall, I think much better now.

@David - excellent observation about the sharpness and detail throughout the depth of this image.  Now in this particular image, I think the detail front to back works.  However, I've already learned that just because focus stacking is a great and valuable technique, it doesn't mean it should be applied all the time.  There are lots of times where we want the bg to be soft, emphasizing whatever subject we have up front.  I found this so true in some aspen images I have from October.  A 5-image stack with detail throughout just didn't look good.  It wasn't until I let the background go soft that the image had a much more pleasing glow to it because all the leaves way in the back were soft and out of focus.  

Just like everything else, using the tools, techniques, etc. not just because they're neat stuff, but because it's the right thing for a particular image.  Good stuff.

Thanks for comments so far.  I hope the repost looks better.
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on November 21, 2015 at 5:19 PM
Lon, I also prefer the softer, less saturated colors of the DSLR version, although the repost looks good as well. I like the cooler, gray bg. The textures in the trees become a prominent part of the image. Excellent. 
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Alberto Patiño on November 21, 2015 at 6:52 PM
I definitely like the colors on this one more. This image has something of an "HDR" look on my monitor, though, especially on the bark of the pine trees, but also in the needles. Perhaps this is a side effect of the focus stack? It looks a bit unnatural to me, but it is all part of the creative process!!
Registered on December 2, 2014, 278 Posts, 1736 Comments
Comment posted by gary phillips on November 21, 2015 at 6:55 PM
The sharpness front to back really makes this image sing. Definately worth it in this case.  The re-post takes it up another notch. Love the ponderosas and the gentle yellows of the maples.  The 2012 image is quite red.  Beautiful work Lon.
Registered on October 24, 2013, 185 Posts, 4136 Comments
Comment posted by Brian Schrayer on November 21, 2015 at 9:58 PM
Great to see you posting again, Lon.  I have missed your beautiful images and constructive comments.  Surprised to see that digital camera too!  cool

As always this is a great comp.  I saw the repost after scrolling down and agree that it has more life to it.  To my eye the original doesn't appear over-saturated, I think it's just a function of the different conditions as you noted.  I definitely admire your ability to see the order in these complex forest scenes. 
Registered on May 28, 2004, 114 Posts, 2890 Comments
Comment posted by Louis Pattis on November 22, 2015 at 12:05 AM
Both processed versions are excellent, you drawing a Blanc because you nailed it, it happens. Just to be a pain  I like the crisp bark on the three trees in the first version and the foliage in the second, so a combo is my preference.
Registered on March 30, 2012, 0 Posts, 164 Comments
Comment posted by Dietrich Gloger on November 22, 2015 at 2:16 AM
Strange how we can't evaluate things on an absolute scale - the direct side by side comparison reveals the saturation in the 4x5" version. I actually might also prefer this new composition. The view is a bit wider, giving more context. I also like how the small pine on the left border frames the scene, balancing with the tall (frame-)pine on the right border. This and keeps my eye in the scene. The 4x5'' had a more "open" composition. I think this one is the stronger rendition.
Registered on January 26, 2007, 360 Posts, 9876 Comments
Comment posted by Roel Wijtmans on November 22, 2015 at 12:06 PM
Colors in the repo looks spot on! Photography (especially digital) is very much dependant on our mood, and especially the color varies because of that. Sometimes I look at older photos and say "what was I thinking there with those colors", but that's just the way it is. But I prefer the colors of the repo over the older photo. The more initimate composition of the older version is stronger in my eyes though, even if this one is very nice as well. But I like the older layered composition a bit more.
Registered on September 30, 2012, 116 Posts, 2257 Comments
Comment posted by Jim Jirka on November 22, 2015 at 12:07 PM
The repost is such an improvement. I like the way you presented the pines with the grain clearly defined. And the background yellow tree just sets everything off.
Jim
Registered on November 1, 2003, 254 Posts, 1620 Comments
Comment posted by Prashant Khapane on November 22, 2015 at 5:10 PM
the updated version just rocks.
Registered on November 1, 2003, 492 Posts, 4580 Comments
Comment posted by Daniel Rappaport on November 22, 2015 at 6:59 PM
I like both and don't find the higher saturation to be a negative.  It's the strongly figured tree trunks - Ponderosa Pines? - that really capture my attention.
Registered on September 9, 2009, 294 Posts, 2006 Comments
Comment posted by Albert Darmo on November 22, 2015 at 10:24 PM
 Hi Lon crying   Agree with  Harley ,   in  the repost, warming up the colors  adds more  life to the image.   the correction makes an  excellent  presentation ..  amazing   to  see the change  of  color tones from velvia to digital.

Albert Darmo
Canada
Registered on November 25, 2008, 1386 Posts, 11978 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Fach on November 22, 2015 at 10:26 PM
Lon: I like your new version and the old. As an avowed color junkie I don't mind the original but I must admit there is great appeal to the more subdued color palette of the current image. Marvelous scene superbly crafted.>=))>
Registered on November 1, 2003, 1805 Posts, 26981 Comments
Comment posted by Mark Metternich on November 23, 2015 at 8:37 PM
Damn nice clean shot, congrats.  
Registered on June 19, 2009, 276 Posts, 6240 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Chambers on November 26, 2015 at 11:19 PM
So glad to see you back on NPN!!!  You images look as good as ever; this one's a real beauty.  
Registered on April 10, 2005, 753 Posts, 21216 Comments
Comment posted by Youssef Ismail on December 10, 2015 at 8:35 PM
I remember the original and maybe the original is a bit oversaturated, but, this version, the new one, jsut seems to lack depth that the original definitely had.
Registered on November 1, 2003, 474 Posts, 5555 Comments