My objective is to convey an image that is rarely viewed at typical Landscape camera and lens settings.
First, a 12mm field of view, with zero zistortion Composed to take advantage of the far reaches of 12mm. Second; a big Depth of Field with 12mm, using F9 focus stacking throughout the scene; extreme front to back clarity. Third, a huge hand blend effort to accommodate the extreme mid morning dynamic range of light with 6 different exposure images, then stitched, top with bottom.
I’m trying to convey exactly what I saw with my eye at that time of day.
I think can do this image at 5.6 but I’m not quite there yet with my technical abilities, and I’m not too sure it’s that much of a difference to even bother getting there.
Does this look natural to your eye?
Kane
Posted by Jack Garrett on June 28, 2012 at 11:06 PM
John, maybe you can help. Is it too wide? I tend to get excited about showing wide angle, forest images with little distortion. Straight up and down trees with foreground is something I've been striving after for years.
Or is there just too much going on? Too much extreme range to the eye. Does it look messy?
Good question Bill. I have this thing in me that wants top optics in my images. For obssesive reasons I want a 5.6 focus stack to ensure complete optic performance. Like noted above, I possibly don't need a 5.6.
This is obviously an impressive technical achievement. You overcame some of the very difficult lighting conditions to get the shot. But from an artistic standpoint, the image doesn't quite work for me. The lighting still seems too harsh. To me, the shadows on the ferns and trees detract from the image. They make the image very busy and don't give my eye anything to focus on. "Golden hour" light or overcast light may have provided "easier" lighting conditions that you were intentionally avoiding, but ultimately I think that is what is needed in a traditional landscape shot like this. If you were trying for a really weird, unique shot and it was obvious that you were shooting in unconventional light for a reason, then I might think differently.
Well, Grant did all of the heavy lifting for me, Kane. The scope of the scene (width) is perfect, but for a more aesthetically pleasing image, I would have preferred better light.
Posted by Jack Garrett on June 29, 2012 at 9:26 AM
Kane, What Grant said perfectly sums it up for me. I think you have achieved technical perfection with the shot for what you were trying to do. I can't find a real point to focus on and the time of day just makes this hard to feel any emotion...the light is too harsh. Just my 2 cents worth.
Posted by Jack Garrett on June 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM
I might add that if you used this technique in a golden hour shot with the right place and comp, you would have an awesome production!
I think Grant focused on why it's not quite there. It is fairly normal looking, but hard to find flow or a main subject. Also, there still seems to be distortion on the closest ferns. And, the color on the ferns seems to yellow, but that could just be my old monitor. To me the light still isn't quite right as I expect the bright light to be brighter, but the shadows look very natural to my eye. I admire your creative drive to work this hard on a vision, and to bring it this close. The whole effort is mind boggling to me. I think with the right scene and your skills, you will achieve what you aim for. Keep bringing these to us. I ,for one, look forward to watching your progress.
All, and especially Grant; thanks for the excellent comments and critique. I really enjoy hearing feedback that makes sense and allows me to move forward past these kinds of scenes that I'm on the fence with. I remember shooting the scene with the hope I could pull off the processing to match the scene. So, I mostly succeeded conveying the scene however in retrospect the overall image fell a bit short in the lighting category which in most cases is the number one component in landscape.
I was lucky enough to spend the night out that evening capturing low light images in the forest. Ill try to get one submitted to NPN tonight.
Discussion
11 repliesFirst, a 12mm field of view, with zero zistortion Composed to take advantage of the far reaches of 12mm. Second; a big Depth of Field with 12mm, using F9 focus stacking throughout the scene; extreme front to back clarity. Third, a huge hand blend effort to accommodate the extreme mid morning dynamic range of light with 6 different exposure images, then stitched, top with bottom.
I’m trying to convey exactly what I saw with my eye at that time of day.
I think can do this image at 5.6 but I’m not quite there yet with my technical abilities, and I’m not too sure it’s that much of a difference to even bother getting there.
Does this look natural to your eye?
Kane
Why are you considering an f5.6 focus stack?
Are your lens optics / lack of diffraction that much better at f5.6 over f9 ?
John, maybe you can help. Is it too wide? I tend to get excited about showing wide angle, forest images with little distortion. Straight up and down trees with foreground is something I've been striving after for years.
Or is there just too much going on? Too much extreme range to the eye. Does it look messy?
Or does the scene just not do it for you?
Sincerely
Kane
I was lucky enough to spend the night out that evening capturing low light images in the forest. Ill try to get one submitted to NPN tonight.