One BIG Kebler Photo (w/repost)

I'm posting something a little different today as I continue processing images from the fall. I don't usually do photo stitches but I tried shooting for some possible panos on my Colorado trip a few weeks ago. This one worked out the best. The vivid sunset here, which I must have shared with thirty other photographers at the Dike/Horse Ranch Park area, cried out for an expansive view. Check out the link: http://www.viewfindermedia.com/forumpics/KeblerDikePano1-BigWeb.jpg to see a much bigger version. Comments always welcome.

Nikon D300, 35-80mm f/4-5.6 D lens, each photo taken at 1s at F/11, ISO 200. Six images merged in Photoshop CS3 with a little bit cropped off the edges.

Edited on 11-26 5 pm MST: The link above now goes to a new version of the photo with a few more tree trunks visible on the bottom. File is about 3mb so it can load a little slowly on some computers. Thanks for the comments.

Do you mean comments besides "WOW!!!"? I'd like to have seen more of the aspens and their white trunks along the bottom of the photo, but that's quibbling for perfection when nearly so will do.

Ditto Todd's sentiment - the bottom feels a little truncated, but the expansive view and incredible color display more than makes up for it. Should make for a killer print!

Great color and amazing view. Very nice.

Absolutely gorgeous colors. I also agree with the truncation issue, but no biggie. Maybe do a little noise cleanup in the sky (particularly on the left side) and print it up....BIG!

Amaing details and color! Great image.

Pretty sweet, Josh! Personally, id like to see just a little more fg (it feels slightly cut off) but the positives here definitely overwhelm that minor quibble.
Wait, i should have read the other comments first, since the others agree with me i change my mind--it's just perfect!!

Sweet - great color and moment!

Had to wait a while for the full screen version to load on a slow hotel wi-fi connection, but it was worth the wait!. The bottom maybe could of used some tree trunks, but that is a very minor nit imo, the image in pano is excellent - sweet light and details!.

Thanks all. Yeah, I had more of the tree trunks on the bottom in the original files but had to crop them after I made adjustments to correct a little lens distortion. It was a choice between having the mountains look a bit stretched or losing some foreground. I chose the latter. Next time I'll have to do a second, lower sweep when I take the photos to get more of the trunks. Double the megapixels, double the fun right? Then I'd have an even bigger photo!

Hi Josh, nice shot!
Did you try shooting this with the camera in the vertical position? If not, that might have given you a little more subject matter in the foreground. I'm starting to take a lot more panoramic photos,because there's a definite demand these days. I'm currently using a Kirk "L" bracket so I can clamp the camera vertically in the RRS pano adapter. This seems to be working out better than the usual horizontal format I've used in the past.

Ken

That's a very astute suggestion Ken. Horizontal images were used for this one. This is another reason to remember to shoot more verticals (always something I've tried to keep in mind when thinking about shooting for magazine covers, etc. before.)

I'm in agreement with the others about the truncation issue, but this sure is a sweet shot. I'd love to see it large and on a wall.

Just a note: I have reuploaded an edited version of the photo with a few more tree trunks visible. While it's still maybe not the widest view for the foreground, this is a modest improvement. The new one (same link as above) is slightly larger, by about 500kb, than the first one so be prepared if you have dial-up. I like this version better. Thanks again for the comments.