Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.
Cathedral Sunset
‹ PreviousLandscape GalleryNext ›

Cathedral Sunset

by scott lanz

Gallery: LandscapePosted June 11, 20179,830 views8 comments
Thank you for comments and suggestions on the previous Cathedral valley image. This was taken a few minutes later at sunset. I cropped the bottom to eliminate the dirt road going up the hill that was visible at the bottom. Suggestions and comments welcome. Single image, D600, 24-70 f2.8 @ 42 and f16, .5, iso 200, mult. gnds (hh), tripod. 

Comments

8 comments
Comment posted by Shirley Freeman on June 11, 2017 at 2:55 PM
Oh Scott, this is beautiful!  I can just see this as a metal print in a living room.  The sky is so complimentary to this beautiful scene.  Well done.  No nits here.
Registered on May 27, 2017, 77 Posts, 844 Comments
Comment posted by Harley Goldman on June 11, 2017 at 7:41 PM
This one is nice, but I much prefer your previous rendition, with its warmer light on the formation and valley floor. 
Registered on November 19, 2003, 586 Posts, 11271 Comments
Comment posted by Michael Bjornbak on June 11, 2017 at 8:57 PM
Scott:
Another stunning image. I like how the foreground formations are illuminated and the formations further 
back are less lit. It creates a pleasing 3-D effect to the image. Nice work!
Registered on May 13, 2017, 17 Posts, 23 Comments
Comment posted by Doug Koepsel on June 12, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Scott,
Like Harley, my preference is for the other take as I feel the sky and light on the formations are more pleasing.   I also like in the other that the formation on the left is whole. 
Why f/16?  It looks like you may have been able to use a sharper f/8 and gotten the needed depth of field for the scene.
I like the character the virga gives the sky.
Registered on April 1, 2010, 196 Posts, 1592 Comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on June 12, 2017 at 11:52 AM
Thank you for your comments. Harley and Doug,  just the kind of opinion I was looking for. Some low clouds rolled in over the ridge behind me and blocked the sun just after I shot the previous image. I still got some nice color in the clouds, but no more light in the valley or on the formations. However, I wanted to see what others thought about this later version.

Doug, to answer your questions why f16, there are a couple reasons. First, I have found, at least for my needs, that f16 is at or near the area of max sharpness for the nikon 24-70 f2.8. Second, I still use GND filters, which I handhold. I can move the GNDs during longer exposures which can help even out the exposure and avoid grad lines.
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Vance Gese on June 12, 2017 at 5:38 PM
Another truly outstanding image from what had to be a memorable evening, Scott.  I do prefer your previous image though as the light just seems a tad better, especially that gracing the bluffs.  Still, an amazing image.
Registered on November 13, 2008, 298 Posts, 6629 Comments
Comment posted by gary phillips on June 14, 2017 at 12:42 AM
Really nice, Scott.  I know that there is really not competition between images from a particular shoot.  Everything changes very quickly and you roll with it. I do think that comparisons are inevitable and as such, I also prefer your first post.  I also think that if I hadn't seen that image, I would still really like this one.  I have been there several times, usually with marginal light, and I still don't have one I really like.  Beautiful..
Registered on October 24, 2013, 185 Posts, 4136 Comments
Comment posted by Alberto Patiño on June 14, 2017 at 12:44 AM
I like the light in this one more, by a small margin. I don't see the "crispiness" that caught my eye in the previous version. What a great place this is!!!
Registered on December 2, 2014, 278 Posts, 1736 Comments