Sunrise from Kit Carson

Hi everyone,
I finally finished editing my images from two major trips to the Sangres back in June. The shot included here (and in a larger size) was taken from the summit of Kit Carson at sunrise. I used HDR Efex Pro 2, but my goal was a natural, believable look in this high-contrast situation. Did I achieve that? I'd also like feedback on the level of local contrast in the shadowed face of Crestone Peak, the major peak near the center of the frame. Too much? Too little? Thanks in advance for your comments!

IMO, you should avoid HDR software like the bubonic plague unless you have played with it behind closed doors for at least a few years. It destroys contrast, which obviously is the landscape photographer's best friend, and that is what it has done here. Brighter sky and darker mid fg would help. The tweaks themselves are not that huge, but i think theyd make a big difference. If you need a reference, what i suggest is too process the exposures separately--in other words process a shot just for the sky, another one just for the fg, forgetting about how the rest of the shot looks. That will give you a reference to how the shot as a whole should look, which should be the goal. Just my take

That looks pretty good on my monitor, but a agree with Stan that a few small contrast tweaks would make it superb.

This is a stellar composition with some excellent light! Well worth the effort to 'develop' with a more natural contrast.
The boulder in the left foreground in particular looks a bit artificial.
Looks like it took an almighty effort to get here, and your efforts were well rewarded.

LIke mentioned, nice lighting on this image. But I certainly would not give up on HDR Pro2. You can try to up the contrast in the software itself or use Pro Contrast if you have Nik Color efex 4. It works amazingly quite well. Also, in HDR Pro there is a new "depth" control slider. It should provide the difference in darking some areas to provide an improvement in contrast.
At least in my humble opinion, HDR still has a place in post processing to achieve the dynamic range one actually sees, but most cameras can't capture. I find it interesting lower level cameras now have HDR built in as an option.

Oh I agree, Ken--HDR definitely has a place. My point is that with the software you give up a certain amount of control unless you are willing to painstakingly learn every way to control it. I'll be the first one to buy a software if im convinced i can achieve better results with the software (in less time) than i can with manual blends, which is how i process HDR now. I just haven't seen the better results. Ive seen some really good results--but those tend to be from photographers who either a) also have mastered digital blending, or b) spend many many hours using the software. The bottom line is that with HDR you are basically 'replacing' a pixel from one exposure with a pixel from another exposure. I'd rather make the decision how and where to do that then let an algorithm make the decision for me.

This is a tough crowd.....

This image looks within reason and not over the top. Would a little darker foreground help? Maybe.

Nice image, Glenn.

Nice comp,

But yep, I do see the HDR signature picking up in the foreground where the contrast got lost. HDR also softens up clouds due to motion (hard to tell in this case) I dont know if ND Grads were used, but I think this is the kind of shot were they would be used. Or lots of layers in PS. If there is enough color separation, I might suggest NIK Vivesa to effectively control the layers using grouped control points.

Nevertheless, good eye. good comp. powerful scene!

Hi, Glenn
Fantastic comp & well worth the effort it took to get it. I was taught that the eye goes first to the brightest part of the image that's along a border, and in this image, that's the lower right corner, which is a long ways from what is the main subject. Also, the sky & clouds look muddy. Not having been there, I can only guess that there was a lot more luminosity in how the light hit the peaks & clouds. Maybe a touch too far right on the structure slider for the face of Kit Carson. This feels a bit like a 5.6 climber giving beta on a .12c, so I hope you'll forgive me.

Awesome view, and that must have been quite an adventure to get up there before sunrise! I agree with some of the other comments that this could use a bit more contrast to enhance the clarity.

Thanks for all the feedback! It's always fascinating to see my work through other people's eyes. I'll take all your comments into consideration when I do the final tweaks.

Hi Glenn, this one doesn't work for me either. The comp is pretty good but the shadows appear as though you used a shadow slider from a proprietary software program like DPP or NX2. It's the hdr at work here that just doesn't look like a real scene, or your usual top notch summit images. That early you shoot cool, however when you recover shadows "that" cool they come out cyan from my experience. That’s not what they look like. It’s a tough situation and one I’m still having trouble understanding as a summit shooter. I’m thinking a hand blend of cool highlights and warmer shadows gives you the real scene.

Bottom line in my opinion is the lack of morning light beaming across the Sangre summits from your Kit Carson perspective is pushing you to try a different technique to enhance the shadow ridden image. You realize the solid comp, plus you invested a lot of time and strong effort in attaining that summit, but in the end it may just be falling flat? Maybe not with a good hand blend which will always trump the best hdr.

Comp-wise I’m wondering if there’s a perspective more east that includes the nice morning light on the Prow. You and I know that the Prow is Kits most photogenic feature. My eyes see the beginning of the Prow but it suddenly ends. Thus I’m not sold on the comp as “stellar.”

I think I understand your summit shot issue. There's just not very much nice light from that summit in the morning.... That's the problem with that great mountain. It's easily a top two-three beautiful Colorado mountain but it just doesn't lend itself to excellent morning or evening light. Thus you have a ton of shadow to deal with, morning and evening. From that Kit Carson perspective, I think you're gonna get the same shadow ridden perspective at night too. I assume you agree, thus your attempt in the am. I’m also thinking you knew this going into the image, thus the spring timing. You knew you were gonna need the snow laced gullies and couloirs to bring out your shadows.

I've researched the great north face of Crestone too many times to remember and as I recall, there may be a short 2-3 day stretch in April where a sunset may give you a bit of nice light on that face, but nothing worth that herculean effort in April. Otherwise I think we just have to wait on Kit’s summit for alpenglow. If that’s the case, then I’m game for a shot of that perspective from the Bears Playground.

If you figure it out, then let me know! In fact, don’t let me know, just shoot it and show us. If I want it bad enough I’ll figure it out. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be?

Kane

Tough crowd indeed! Great shot - yes it could use more contrast and darker shadows but I still find this a decent process job. Personally I would recommend a two shot blend, with a gradient mask and then use the paintbrush to get the uneven lines to blend. Or increase contrast and consider desatting the image a tad as increased contrast can also increase saturation.

Glenn, I like the view and the layers of ridges it affords. As mentioned above, this needs the contrast added back in to give depth and separation by darkening the depths between the ridges and in crevasses of the faces. Possibly also a very slight bump in saturation to enhance the sunny tips of rock and the sky?
I am unsure of the darker bands/sections of rock. Are these intrusions of darker basalt showing, or a result of the HDR?

Thanks for the additional responses. Kane, thanks in particular for your thoughtful comments. I think you were quite perceptive in your analysis of the problems of shooting sunrise from Kit Carson. Althought sunset would work better, the logistical problems of doing that are a nightmare. I posted this photo because I thought it was a challenging situation. Most of the image is shadowed. The hazy sunrise both dulled the color of the light and made the shadows even flatter than normal. A simple bump in global contrast is not sufficient to solve the problem because that just leaves the overall feeling of the image too dark. So the tricky part is opening up the shadows sufficiently to prevent the image from feeling heavy, and also increasing local contrast within the shadowed region to give those areas enough interest to carry the shot, all while maintaining a believable feel. I also thought you were quite perceptive in your comment that opening up deep shadows in summit shots often gave them a cyan cast. Although I don't see cyan in the shadows of my original HDR, I do see that the shadows are cooler there than in the frame from the bracketed set that is properly exposed for shadows. BTW: I did a hand blending of the good-highlight and good-shadow exposures, and concluded that without additional work to build local contrast in the shadows, it wasn't an improvement over the HDR except in the slightly better color balance.

I can't even imagine how difficult it was to pull this shot off. I agree more contrast is needed, but your comp and work here is to be commended.

Gorgeous image Glenn, I really like the subtle play of light, really well seen and processed.