Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Kit Carson Mountain

Discussion

12 replies
Posted by Kane Engelbert on May 5, 2012 at 12:21 PM
A better name could be "Kit Carson massif" because were really talking about three ranked peaks, Challenger (14081,) Kit (14,165), and Columbia Point (13,980.) I've always been impressed by the sheer size of this mountain but have really never captured its enormity with my camera. I really can't think of many other Colorado mountains that can rival Kit Carson's geological presence; possibly the Eolus massif in the San Juans? Up for debate!

At any rate, not many tricks here, just a straight on pano with zero foreground. Sort of let the mountain speak for itself.

Submitted are a Black and White image (attatched Large image) with Selenium toning and a touch of Curves, and your basic color image. I think I'm leaning toward the B&W but want to know your preference.
Posted by Kane Engelbert on May 5, 2012 at 12:22 PM
Color
Posted by Randy Van Winkle on May 5, 2012 at 12:27 PM
Great shot Kane! I definitely like the B&W better. For some reason it gives me a better sense of the topography. The way the snow fields spiderweb across the rigdelines is just beautiful! Well done; and a truly impressive massif indeed.
Posted by Guy Schmickle on May 5, 2012 at 3:58 PM
Yeah...I'd have to vote for the b&w as well. It just brings out the textures better. Of course, the fact that its bigger could also be the reason as well.
Posted by John Mumaw on May 5, 2012 at 10:53 PM
I like the b&w version because it has the entire range of tones from whites to blacks. This mountain does indeed speak for itself. No foreground needed.
Posted by Jack Garrett on May 5, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Because the color version doesn't really have a whole lot of pop to it, I'd say the B/w version. You did a nice job bringing out all the contrast...it really looks great!!
Posted by Doug Koepsel on May 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM
I too prefer the B&W version. I could maybe envision an added vignette along the bottom and LRC.
Posted by Glenn Randall on May 6, 2012 at 3:14 PM
I'm going to take a contrarian view and say I prefer the color version (although I like the b&w a lot). I like the hint of warmth in the late afternoon light.
Posted by Adam Schallau on May 6, 2012 at 5:59 PM
I prefer the color version myself. The b&w is nice, but it is lacking punch. All things considered, I'd be happy to have either version in my portfolio.
Posted by Jack Brauer on May 7, 2012 at 11:28 AM
NICE! I like all your high posts lately. This shot definitely shows off the geologic massiveness, like you said. As for rivals... good question! Potosi always impresses me. Maybe Pyramid Peak in the Elks?
Posted by Jeff Hackett on May 7, 2012 at 2:39 PM
I'm rollin' with the black and white. Very cool.
Posted by Morris McClung on May 7, 2012 at 4:21 PM
Both evoke such different emotional response in me, that I couldn't decide which would be "better." I guess I do prefer the B&W for those rich tones, but not by much. :toast:
Posted by Joshua Warrender on May 8, 2012 at 8:33 AM
Another nod for the color version Kane, though both are nice. You are on a roll lately. :toast: