This morning I spent sunrise just below Emerald Lake in RMNP shooting Flattop Mountain. I really want to keep growing in my photographic and post-processing skills. What do you think I could have done to make this image better either in the actual taking of the image and composition or in post-processing? Thanks!
I think the only thing that you can take away from this image is the fact that you need to move. I mean clearly there is nothing beautiful up in your neck of the woods so you had just better find a more scenic locale.
The only thing I would say is that you are losing some of the reflection of the mountain in the water due to that rock in the center. Perhaps you could have moved to the right a few feet to catch more of that in the water, but then I think you may have had issues cutting off too much of the large rock on the left hand side and throwing off the position of the mountains within the frame.
Your foreground composition is always very well thought out and well positioned in your images - so I have a feeling you made the right choice in arriving at this comp. So, the net takeaway is I am reaching for suggestions to make this one better, because the image is just so damn good as it is. :)
Looks like you are enjoying the 5D? I am thinking about making the leap myself to a 5D - but this will be the first DSLR for me.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on June 20, 2007 at 12:10 PM
I would try to move so that the reflection caught in the smooth part of the water. Thats it. To me, the exposure looks natural and I wouldn't mess with it.
Posted by Mike McNeill on June 20, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Hi Eric,
Yes a beauty indeed. My only suggestion would be to crop the bottom inch and a little shadow hilight to bring more detail in the tress as well as the pond reflections.
Forgive me if this is considered to be bad protocol, but I took the liberty to show you what I've suggested. I am in town until Monday the 25th, and I plan to stop by.
The foreground/rocks look like they might be a little too blue. I'd try a curves layer with a mask for the foreground and see if you like it better with the blue reduced a bit. A little curves adjustment to bring out the reflected color works well, but I don't like brightened trees. I agree with Mel that I like the esposure as is, these are just kind of minor experiments.
I like the comp, however I think I would have stepped back a bit and shot it with a longer lens to make flatop bigger.
Hey Erik, great shot! I too like Mike's crop, since I think the rock in the full version points my eye down and out of the photo, and also weighs the photo a little too heavy on the left. I probably wouldn't be as liberal on the brightening as his though.
I always wanted to shoot this shot and you did it wonderfully! Thanks for showing the possibilities!
Posted by David Svilar on June 20, 2007 at 7:32 PM
Your shot looks great. The subtle reflection in the water makes it. Sorry to ruin your solitude up there this morning! Wasn't expecting to see anyone in that spot.
Erik... awesome shot man! I love that golden reflection in the blue pond. I agree with the crop and where Mike put it. I think I would drop the lightening down just a smidge though.
So, how come it is called Flat Top Mtn when it ain't even!
John
Erik,
I hope to see this one hanging in your gallery! I love it. Processing-wise, I think something between your image, and Mike's version would be best. I also wouldn't take off as much from the bottom as Mike did. I'm not fond of the cut off rock. Of course, with that 5D you've got room to play.
Photomatix is a great utility. All I have is the tonemapping plugin for CS2, and it's a beautiful thing. It works a lot like shadow/highlight, but operates differently enough to make the investment worthwhile. A photo like this is just was tonemapping was made for.
Posted by Tony Bouchard on June 20, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Can you explain how tonemapping was made for this shot? I see nothing wrong with Erik's original image.
Posted by David Svilar on June 21, 2007 at 12:12 AM
Your shot looks great. The subtle reflection in the water makes it. Sorry to ruin your solitude up there this morning! Wasn't expecting to see anyone in that spot.
Posted by Doug Andrews on June 21, 2007 at 12:29 AM
The exposure looks fine. It look slightly oversharpened to me, but since no one else has mentioned that, perhaps its just my monitor.
If you like the original as is, that's fine. Processing is a matter of taste. He asked for processing suggestions, and a light tonemapping is exactly what I would do. This is the effect of tonemapping, the only processing I did, as an example.
Posted by Mike McNeill on June 21, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Hi Rebecca,
Where does one download this Tonemapping from? To be honest I dont see much difference from your version and Eric's, but I would like to try tonemapping on some of my images to see if I like it.
Erik, beautiful comp as usual. I think your version is perhaps a tad dark and Mike's a bit bright. Middle ground would be the best here for exposure, but I like your original crop as it leaves some of the blue sky reflecting in the water. I would try to enhance that to get something similar to what Rebecca's Tonemapping example shows. In fact, I like her version the best; it brought up the foreground brightness a bit (this might still need just a bit more exposure, but that's personal preference I think), it increased the contrast (it looks sharper) and it brought out some beautiful color in the water.
I don't think you need Photomatix to do what she did, as a simple contrast mask would probably accomplish the same thing and it's easily accomplished in Photoshop.
Great comments everyone. Thanks for all the input!!! I've settled on a slightly cropped version with the lighting between the original and Mike's suggestion. I just ordered a small print and hope I can print this large. Boy, I love my 5D!
Posted by Jesse Speer on June 25, 2007 at 12:26 PM
I'm just seeing this today Erik. BEAUTIFUL. Definitely one of your best. And I'll throw in my vote for Rebeccah's version, no crop and slight adjustment of the shadow areas. Glad you got a 5d!
Discussion
23 repliesCanon 5D, 3xGND, 17-40, Adamus web sharpening
I think the only thing that you can take away from this image is the fact that you need to move. I mean clearly there is nothing beautiful up in your neck of the woods so you had just better find a more scenic locale.
The only thing I would say is that you are losing some of the reflection of the mountain in the water due to that rock in the center. Perhaps you could have moved to the right a few feet to catch more of that in the water, but then I think you may have had issues cutting off too much of the large rock on the left hand side and throwing off the position of the mountains within the frame.
Your foreground composition is always very well thought out and well positioned in your images - so I have a feeling you made the right choice in arriving at this comp. So, the net takeaway is I am reaching for suggestions to make this one better, because the image is just so damn good as it is. :)
Looks like you are enjoying the 5D? I am thinking about making the leap myself to a 5D - but this will be the first DSLR for me.
Yes a beauty indeed. My only suggestion would be to crop the bottom inch and a little shadow hilight to bring more detail in the tress as well as the pond reflections.
Forgive me if this is considered to be bad protocol, but I took the liberty to show you what I've suggested. I am in town until Monday the 25th, and I plan to stop by.
Mike
Your photo is amazing. Mike's rework makes it even better. I think this is one of your very best!
I like the comp, however I think I would have stepped back a bit and shot it with a longer lens to make flatop bigger.
So, how come it is called Flat Top Mtn when it ain't even!
John
I hope to see this one hanging in your gallery! I love it. Processing-wise, I think something between your image, and Mike's version would be best. I also wouldn't take off as much from the bottom as Mike did. I'm not fond of the cut off rock. Of course, with that 5D you've got room to play.
If you like the original as is, that's fine. Processing is a matter of taste. He asked for processing suggestions, and a light tonemapping is exactly what I would do. This is the effect of tonemapping, the only processing I did, as an example.
Tonemapped Version
Where does one download this Tonemapping from? To be honest I dont see much difference from your version and Eric's, but I would like to try tonemapping on some of my images to see if I like it.
Thanks for the info!!
Mike
I don't think you need Photomatix to do what she did, as a simple contrast mask would probably accomplish the same thing and it's easily accomplished in Photoshop.
So, did you get Photoshop to go with that 5D?
Craig
Sorry Craig, no PS with it yet.
http://www.hdrsoft.com/download.html
I used a very very light application. It can get quite psychedelic.