Posted by Marc Adamus on March 27, 2009 at 1:12 PM
Someone had to shoot those Grass Widows up on the Roweena plains. Really a bumper crop this year. I had some big skies to work with on this evening a week ago and tried to use the wide angle to create a sense of vastness and loneliness with the solitary oak in the center.
1Ds III, 16-35 II at 16mm, 4 exposures blended for wind motion and to limit diffraction - selective details preserved with two exposures at 1/100 and ISO 1600 from two focal points at f/14. The majority of the image shot at 1/2 second, ISO 100, again with two focal points blended at f/14.
Let me know what you think of this one.
Posted by Chris Hodney on March 27, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Marc, this shot is really nice. I think it's so hard to make these sort of scenes look good, and your dark processing focuses on the silhouettes, and what color is there, really well.
The fact that these are the only discernible widows in the scene adds much more meaning IMHO. The desolateness of everything else, accentuates the new life around the Widows, and that is reinforced by the color in the sky well. The motion of the grass mirrored by the wispy clouds in the sky......really great composition throughout. I think this is a fantastic addition to your portfolio as it is so different.
I've been playing with multiple focal points since diffraction is much more of an issue with my 50D than the 20D. Would you mind telling where in this scene your 2 focal planes/points were? Did you use a GND on this, or just blend exposures here?
Marc,
it appears that your personal taste as of late is for really dark images. This is pretty, but as you know from my current tastes...the darkness is hard to look past. Also as for comp... having the flowers lined up with the tree, makes it compete too much some how. I'd much more prefer that you would have staggered the elements more. I see a comp here where because of the flow of the tree...that the flowers should be placed towards the bottom left portion of the frame...or maybe the bottom right. Did you play with comp anymore on this scene?
Posted by Marc Adamus on March 27, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Rick, in regards to the composition, take a look at the angles here (not that you haven't). If I move right and rotate CCW, I clip the branches at right. If I move left, and rotate CW, I loose the whisps of clouds at left and hide more cloud behind the tree. I can't go lower, and higher or backward places too much space around the flowers. I worked it and couldn't find a better angle unless the cloud moved. But that's not to say a better angle couldn't have worked better somehow.
As for darkness, I like to utilize the dark as an element of both simplification and mood. A brighter foreground reveals a lot of dead grass and such not adding to the comp. By using a dark image, I can isolate and emphasize the flowers better. I also don't generally process these images for every application individually, and there's a lot of dark stuff that works better on my black website than the bright white NPN pages.
Chris, my focal points were the flowers, and just before the tree. Live view DOF preview is an asset in such situations, as an increasing number of cameras now include this option.
I kinda figured you worked all angles here...but I almost felt as if I were on site here finding myslef struggling with the finite balance of composing the elements...especially being @ 16mm. Moving a couple inches can alter the entire feel of the 'scape and although I completely understand your explanation... I just still feel there might have been a better sweet spot here, but again... I wasnt here so that's impossible for me to say with confidence. Thanks for the explanation
Posted by Ned Fenimore on March 27, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Marc - I think the curve of the grasses greatly compliments the shape of the tree, and wisp of the clouds.. creating a visual vortex of sorts.. I dig how dark it is.. been doing more of that myself - though not as much of a scale that you are.. I'd have to give this serious props! (wonder if I will be a useful idiot, now?? )
The overall darkness doesn't work for me, but that's a matter of taste. I'd be interested to see how it translated to a print. I agree with Rick regarding the comp. It's far from a bad comp, but it does seem like something from a slightly different angle would have more impact.
Marc, I would just like to say that I am appreciating your willingness to explain how you create these images. Thank you.
Posted by Cliff Dodge on March 27, 2009 at 9:54 PM
I like it alot. Life is beautiful at the start, moody mid life and hope filled after. Emotion filled pic for me. :)
Posted by Erik Lundh on March 27, 2009 at 11:52 PM
To me the image feels lively. The flowers are dancing to the trees and the tree is singing along. It doesn't seem too dark to me but My Mac Book Pro's display is on the bright side. I really think it's excellent!!
Marc very nice! I like shots of leafless trees and the sky makes all the difference. You captured both very well. The Grass Widows are well placed. Thanks for explaining your process.
I like it Marc, it evokes a certain mood that the darkness enhances. Not your most eyecatching shot, but my guess is your goal was more about capturing the emotions and mood that you were feeling at the time, first and foremost. Still has that signature sky you capture so well!
Posted by Marc Dilley on March 28, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Fascinating. The techniques you had to use to get this image are pretty amazing. I have no problem at all with the overall dark feeling. I like how the flowers appear to be "looking" at the tree leaning with the wind. Unusual and evocative.
Posted by John Williams on March 28, 2009 at 12:21 PM
This is an interesting image, and there is a surprising variability in the comments. I actually like it a lot, and think it is well titled. The flowers and tree do make great focal points, and the background sky is nicely supporting. Photos with isolated, smaller bunches, of flowers are often difficult to pull off without them getting lost. In fact, I don't think this photo would work as well with the flowers to one side or the other because the vacancy it would leave in the side without the flowers would be too weak and somewhat distracting. (A diagonal line of Grass Widows might be another story.) I'll also weigh in and vote for a little more mid tone brightness, even after looking at it with a completely black background.
Posted by Darren White on March 28, 2009 at 12:49 PM
I was up here last weekend too....for sunrise....your sunset was better and I do think this is a nice image.....specially with the huge clouds up there above the tree....
for me personally its too much processing you have done here....and I would have never noticed it if you had not said anything.... because of your processing here, this images becomes one you could not achieve on film. this is a very nice digital creation but for me personally, it realllllllllllly extends the art of "photography" Think back to the days when you were shooting film.
what I would really like to see are the un edited files you had to work with to create this one image!
Keep up the good work but don't let the processing of the images take away from being there and experiencing it first hand...
Posted by Jack Graham on March 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM
1) I love the darkness
2) The clouds and the tree juxtaposition is wonderful.
another winner.
JG
Posted by John Williams on March 28, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Darren, your comment is an interesting one. What baffles me is why achieving what we could on film is the desired result? Am I wrong, or does that line of reasoning take us back to what we could achieve with with pinhole cameras and daguerreotypes?
Posted by James Walley on March 28, 2009 at 6:30 PM
John --
That's a good point. To me, there's a place for "purist" nature photography, and one for creative manipulation of the medium to gain a certain effect. (Is there anyone here who hasn't, at one point or another, created a double exposure of wind-blown wildflowers, one shot taken at high speed to freeze the blooms, another at low speed to capture the motion?) I have no problem with it, as long as the manipulation is acknowledged. I certainly can't see why this wouldn't be a valid use of the photographic medium.
In light of the faux-controversy being stirred up elsewhere, I commend Marc on his openness about the techniques he's using. Personally, I find them innovative and quite clever. My only question to him would be: what technique are you using to blend the four exposures? I'd like to try experimenting with the same method myself.
Posted by Matt Anderson on March 28, 2009 at 6:35 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again...
I love the control one has with dark images.
It gives you the ability to shape light and composition in a more artistic and creative manner.
Some photo's pay the bills, others are crafted from your inner Chakra (for lack of a better term).
IMHO, the later is more true to yourself.
I like dark images, my personal favorites are dark images.
I'd like to see a wee bit of glow (vSl dodge) about the tree, just a hardly noticeable touch.
Posted by Darren White on March 28, 2009 at 10:28 PM
John, you are not wrong but Marc has stated before he does little processing. If you recall one of his images was recently on the cover of OP. Taken back with a 5D I believe, the sea stacks were nice and black and the sunset sky really popped. Today I do not think Marc would process the image the same way, I think today he feels he needs to have a little detail in all the subjects that are in the photograph, and that is where the multiple blends come into play. While I think its great that he is extending his photoshop techniques, I also feel that maybe some of his images are not true to how he could have captured them. When I first met Marc he was always saying how it was so important to get it right in the camera and that is something I still agree with today.... This image shows me that he is not getting it right in the camera and more that he is using multiple exposures so he can take them home and blend them....so now, with the advanced techniques of photoshop, anyone can do the same thing....I personally feel that most of us try to stay true to what we capture on our cards.
I think about this and I can really go both ways....Marc has been a great adventurer and braved the elements for some amazing shots but at the same time he may not be working as hard in the field to get the exposures correct in the camera. This is a subject we all have our own personal feelings about and mine just happens to be one for a more purist stand point.....now I will admit I have added a moon to some of my shots....that I will not deny!!!! Nonetheless I still feel Marc does amazing work but I question his "getting it right in the camera" theory
Posted by Marc Adamus on March 29, 2009 at 12:39 AM
Darren, you can have whatever opinion you want on post processing, but I can tell you it's pointless to have a lengthy discussion on it. I don't care what I've said in the past, I do what I want now, and that's always changing. This is art, and it can be more than simple documentation. I've said before and reiterate now, I don't add or remove elements that weren't actually there. I adjust colors, contrasts, tones, luminosity, brightness, darkness, etc. I never hide this. I want photos with a natural appeal most of the time, but what that is varies from person to person. There's no right answer, but the best answer I can think of isn't often the one on your card. I also want to do whatever I can to develop emotion in my images, whatever that means to me.
I want everyone to know again, as I've disucussed many other times on NPN, my artist's statement, other forums, etc; in recent years, that I am not always for getting it right in camera all the time. A more creative, personal, evocative and many times natural-looking image can be made with the right processing. Times change. Pictures change. Art changes.
By the way, this exposure was right in-camera. I used grads to control the light in all circumstances and only blended images to prevent unnatural blur. You apparently misinterpreted my techique.
Posted by Darren White on March 29, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Thanks for the clarification, Keep up the good work, Marc!
I like what you have made here, Marc. There is a certain harmony about this photograph that flows like a good song.
Posted by John Lehmkuhl on March 31, 2009 at 12:12 AM
There is something special in this shot - it doesn't have much of a WOW factor but it hits different emotional buttons, which like being hit just as well
Well done, Sir Artiste
Posted by Andrew Kumler on March 31, 2009 at 5:38 AM
I really like the tones you have here..My eyes flow through the image easily too..
Nice job on the post work.. =)
As Marc said, this discussion is pointless, and rather a matter of taste. Personally I too would prefer a straight photo out of the camera, with no blending of images, but that's my own personal approach to photography. That being said, blending of images theoretically starts to become more classified as "digital art", than "photography".
But it doesn't matter. The image is wonderful, the atmosphere in it is very strong, the composition is masterful, colours are perfect, it all looks very natural, and I want to be there, as I look at it. Well done!
Discussion
25 replies1Ds III, 16-35 II at 16mm, 4 exposures blended for wind motion and to limit diffraction - selective details preserved with two exposures at 1/100 and ISO 1600 from two focal points at f/14. The majority of the image shot at 1/2 second, ISO 100, again with two focal points blended at f/14.
Let me know what you think of this one.
The fact that these are the only discernible widows in the scene adds much more meaning IMHO. The desolateness of everything else, accentuates the new life around the Widows, and that is reinforced by the color in the sky well. The motion of the grass mirrored by the wispy clouds in the sky......really great composition throughout. I think this is a fantastic addition to your portfolio as it is so different.
I've been playing with multiple focal points since diffraction is much more of an issue with my 50D than the 20D. Would you mind telling where in this scene your 2 focal planes/points were? Did you use a GND on this, or just blend exposures here?
it appears that your personal taste as of late is for really dark images. This is pretty, but as you know from my current tastes...the darkness is hard to look past. Also as for comp... having the flowers lined up with the tree, makes it compete too much some how. I'd much more prefer that you would have staggered the elements more. I see a comp here where because of the flow of the tree...that the flowers should be placed towards the bottom left portion of the frame...or maybe the bottom right. Did you play with comp anymore on this scene?
As for darkness, I like to utilize the dark as an element of both simplification and mood. A brighter foreground reveals a lot of dead grass and such not adding to the comp. By using a dark image, I can isolate and emphasize the flowers better. I also don't generally process these images for every application individually, and there's a lot of dark stuff that works better on my black website than the bright white NPN pages.
Chris, my focal points were the flowers, and just before the tree. Live view DOF preview is an asset in such situations, as an increasing number of cameras now include this option.
for me personally its too much processing you have done here....and I would have never noticed it if you had not said anything.... because of your processing here, this images becomes one you could not achieve on film. this is a very nice digital creation but for me personally, it realllllllllllly extends the art of "photography" Think back to the days when you were shooting film.
what I would really like to see are the un edited files you had to work with to create this one image!
Keep up the good work but don't let the processing of the images take away from being there and experiencing it first hand...
2) The clouds and the tree juxtaposition is wonderful.
another winner.
JG
That's a good point. To me, there's a place for "purist" nature photography, and one for creative manipulation of the medium to gain a certain effect. (Is there anyone here who hasn't, at one point or another, created a double exposure of wind-blown wildflowers, one shot taken at high speed to freeze the blooms, another at low speed to capture the motion?) I have no problem with it, as long as the manipulation is acknowledged. I certainly can't see why this wouldn't be a valid use of the photographic medium.
In light of the faux-controversy being stirred up elsewhere, I commend Marc on his openness about the techniques he's using. Personally, I find them innovative and quite clever. My only question to him would be: what technique are you using to blend the four exposures? I'd like to try experimenting with the same method myself.
I love the control one has with dark images.
It gives you the ability to shape light and composition in a more artistic and creative manner.
Some photo's pay the bills, others are crafted from your inner Chakra (for lack of a better term).
IMHO, the later is more true to yourself.
I like dark images, my personal favorites are dark images.
I'd like to see a wee bit of glow (vSl dodge) about the tree, just a hardly noticeable touch.
I think about this and I can really go both ways....Marc has been a great adventurer and braved the elements for some amazing shots but at the same time he may not be working as hard in the field to get the exposures correct in the camera. This is a subject we all have our own personal feelings about and mine just happens to be one for a more purist stand point.....now I will admit I have added a moon to some of my shots....that I will not deny!!!! Nonetheless I still feel Marc does amazing work but I question his "getting it right in the camera" theory
I want everyone to know again, as I've disucussed many other times on NPN, my artist's statement, other forums, etc; in recent years, that I am not always for getting it right in camera all the time. A more creative, personal, evocative and many times natural-looking image can be made with the right processing. Times change. Pictures change. Art changes.
By the way, this exposure was right in-camera. I used grads to control the light in all circumstances and only blended images to prevent unnatural blur. You apparently misinterpreted my techique.
Well done, Sir Artiste
Nice job on the post work.. =)
But it doesn't matter. The image is wonderful, the atmosphere in it is very strong, the composition is masterful, colours are perfect, it all looks very natural, and I want to be there, as I look at it. Well done!