Need Honest Critique on Grand Canyon Image

I've been working on this image for quite a while and I think I need to get some honest feedback. I'm too close to it to see clearly anymore! There are two separate lightning bolts taken about 1 minute apart so I guess this is, strictly speaking, a composite. The camera was not moved for the two shots, I simply kept firing the shutter hoping to catch lightning.

I've taken it pretty far from the raw file. Is it too far? Is it too contrasty? Too warm? Do I need more definition in the rain bands? Have I gone too far by adding in the second lightning bolt? Please let me know what you think and if you have any suggestions for improvement! Thanks!!

Here is the raw file:

I think the lightning bolts are getting lost against the bright band of sky. I'd suggest darkening and increasing the contrast in that part of the image. Also if you could lighten the dark clouds and the canyon I think the image would be improved. In other words, I think you have too much contrast globally and not enough contrast and tonal separation in the high values and the low values. Just my opinion.

Wow, this is impressive! Thank you for disclosing how you processed the file. I think the composite was done tastefully and the inclusion of the two bolts makes the image even more striking. I don't think it's going to far, as long as you tell people what you have done. Your work to add contrast and bring out the stratifications of the canyon walls looks very effective. The warmer colors, while greatly different from the RAW file, add some nice drama to the scene. I don't think you went too far here either.

The only thing that doesn't work for me is the canyon wall in the lower right corner. It's a bit distracting since it is noticeably brighter, and less significant than the other parts of the canyon. Not a big nit, but I would consider darkening this one wall, maybe reduce some of the saturated yellowish color of it, or perhaps adding some vignette to the image to draw viewers' eyes more toward the lightning bolts.

Phillip, I almost wish you hadn't posted the raw file, because it just doesn't matter. I don't consider myself a documentarian, I think of myself more as an artist. (Others can judge whether I'm successful at THAT!) I reckon you think of yourself the same way. So, it's the final image that matters, not what you started with. Adding a lightning bolt from another image from the stream, amping up and/or altering the color, etc., are all personal decisions infused with a little bit of magic, and to disagree with Joshua, I would NOT disclose that the image is a composite. Magicians don't generally divulge their secrets. Others will chime in with their little, tweaky, nitpicky suggestions, but my advice would be to step back, leave it alone, and let others revel in the incredible beauty of your creation. This photo is DONE!

... this makes me feel edgy, energized, amped, nervous. Its so quiet here typically but there's a white noise that I'm hearing from that wall of rain, punctuated by high-definition cracks of thunder, but that thunder rolls off longer due to the canyon walls bouncing it around for 10 seconds or so.... The smell in the air is now pungent with those rich earthy scents that only come out with moisture. The desert has come back to life if only for a brief moment. So sweet....

Todd brings up an excellent point. Coincidentally, I had a similar conversation about disclosure with several photographers at a gallery last weekend. To clarify, I think the format of how you present work is an important consideration. If your work is documentary, yea you might want to disclose what you've changed. If presenting it as art, I'd actually agree with Todd, there isn't a need to give away your secrets and personal choices (unless you want to show your technique for the educational benefit of others ). There's no problem with stepping away from the computer (we can all get bug-eyed making edit after edit), giving it a second look later and if you're happy with the image (and I don't see a major reason why you shouldn't be here) pressing the PRINT button! As Chris described, this photo really places the viewer inside an electrifyingly exciting environment. That's so cool.

Hi Phillip,

This is a gorgeous image that presents this awe inspiring landscape in such dramatic weather. The bolt(s) of lightning are a lovely touch.

I love the direction you have taken in the processing, but since I find myself more drawn to the color palette in the RAW file, I was wondering if you could kindly share your thoughts on why you chose to go with the warmer version.

The processing is fine-but unlike TC I don't think it's done. I agree with Josh on the LRHC. I think you can massage this image to make it even stronger!!

I would look to tone down what looks like blown out highlights in the sky. Then tackle the lower RHC. It's distracting with that bright yellow color popping out. You could probably could clone it out or blend it in so it has the more subtle effect as seen in the RAW file. (I'm not necessarily saying to blend in the RHC as seen in the repost but give it that subdued effect, which might involve a WB or color adjustment)

You want an HONEST critique, Philip? Does this mean you sometimes get DIShonest critiques? Or is that just your opinion of some of the critiques?

Seriously, if that was my RAW file, I would've also tried to warm it up a bit, but I do think you've gone too far. No offense intended.

Dang, that is some description that Chris gave...it drew me right into the picture. I think it looks very very good...a long way from the raw file for sure! I do agree with Joshua about the LRC being a little light in proportion to the rest of the canyon area...that's my only nit.

Thanks for the comments, everyone! Good point, Howard! What I am looking for, is for people to feel at ease telling me what they really think of this image. I think there are too many "atta boys" and the like in critiques these days and I wanted real input. (not that I expect an atta boy!--gotta watch what I say around Howard!! ).

I can certainly tone down the LRC and I think I will do that. I don't want it to draw attention away from the storm. I warmed the image for two reasons: 1.) earlier in the evening there was a very nice warm glow to the scene like in this image and I wanted to carry that forward. When I shot this photo its was getting late and it was quite dark already--hence the cool tones in the raw file. 2.) I felt that the cooler tones in the raw file just wouldn't give this the punch I was looking for as Chris so aptly described. The yellows and oranges up the energy levels IMO. I can try to darken the middle part of the sky a little to set off the lightning.

Thanks for the suggestions!! Keep 'em coming!

This is a real stunner Phillip. Even though it's nothing like the RAW it evokes powerful emotions with the vibrant colors. As others have mentioned, that lower right hand corner does detract from the overall scene. Simply toning that down and darkening it would surely make it even better. Personally I might even tone down the entire image just a bit. That double lightning is sure the icing on the cake. A wonderful image.

I think it does come off a little contrasty, but for me the biggest issue is the LRC, it just doesn't seem to fit in with the rest of the image. I'm not bothered by the composite, you are adding your artistic input into the image which is what we all do to varying degrees.

What really bugs me is that people make this unspoken assumption that the RAW is somehow more 'documentary' or closer to real. BS!! That's why after posting a RAW file of one of my dune shots yesterday, i had second thoughts and deleted it, because it gives a false impression that the RAW is anywhere close to how 'you actually saw the image'. I personally use RAW post processing to get closer to how i saw the actual scene, not further away! I don't know how you saw this scene at the time, but it looks fairly natural to me in your original post up top. You might have avoided unfair comparisons if you had shot the RAW at WB 7500 rather than Auto, which looks like about 4000 K here. My only nit here is the lrhs, which is a bit distracting, otherwise it looks great to me.

Todd--the problem with the 'magicians don't disclose their methods" idea is that artists are not trying to fool, we're trying to enlighten! Look at my 'Aurora Tribute' in the Photo Art Gallery--do you think it would be OK to post that in the Landscape Gallery and just keep hush about the creation? Why or why not??
EDIT: don't want to derail Phil's post, so please respond in my new separate post.

Phil,

I think this looks pretty freakin' awesome! No need to share the raw file. I do appreciate that you disclosed that it's a composite image, but it wasn't necessary to do so. The lightning display that evening was simply amazing and one frame just doesn't do an adequate job of capturing the experience. My only nit is the brightness of the rock in the lrc...tone it down a bit and you've got a winner!

Nice shot Phil. I'm looking at this image as a thumbnail on my phone and the LRC jumps out immediately, even before the lightning. Something to think about in this cell phone crazy world we live in... BTW, Todd C couldn't have said it better, you're the artist; do as you please, disclose as you please.

Looking at this again I have to agree the LR brighter rocks really pulled my eye this time. Maybe cuz I'm sitting in a darker room. Just knock it down and it'll be perfect!

I'm wondering if Stan and/or anyone else has read the current post by John Camp on Mike Johnston's blog, "The Online Photographer", where there's a current discussion about painting versus photography and art versus documentation. There's more than a few interesting thoughts over there, so I'll let you check it out yourself if you're interested. I, like most of us here I assume, think of myself as a landscape photographer and not a documentary photographer... but, Phillip, this one goes too far for me. By itself, it's a little too much for my tastes, but in comparison to the raw file, it's over the top. Again, that's to my tastes, and you aren't in any way required to justify your work to me or my tastes. It's impressively done from a post-production sense, and it's always nice to get some lightning, but it's lost some element of "truth" to it that is critical (to me) to keep the emotional connection between the image and the landscape.

Just my opinion,
Mark.

I am not reading all the other comments so forgive me if I sound repetitive. I like the colors of the sky better in the RAW. The light coming from behind the canyon walls looks too hot. As far as the canyon walls go - I think they look great. The sky looks good too, I just prefer the cooler colors. The LRC looks a little too bright and is eye catching. You are doing a fantastic job. I hope this helps.

Michael

It's a little heavy on saturation for me, but a fine image otherwise. I understand how you can look so hard and so many times at a shot that it becomes hard to see, but ultimately it comes down to your personal style and how you want to portray the scene.

Phillip, I do not mind the change in color to the higher warmth.
I might suggest reducing the brightness of the far rim and bright sky and maybe increasing its contrast. There also appears to be a green tint as seen in the LRC and lower canyon slopes. The brightness of the LRC has already been mentioned.

I really appreciate everyone's comments and suggestions! Interesting to see the range of responses. RMNP is such a great resource for improving one's skills and having spirited, yet civil discussions!