|
thomasribiere
Apr 3, 2007, 9:44 PM
Post #1 of 15
(1612 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
So let's work on this one as it was bombed by a few user. Classical alpine picture, nothing more.
This is a picture of the shady North Face of the Grandes Jorasses in Chamonix taken from the Aiguille du Midi. It was 4:00 PM. I like it a lot (both shades and framing), though it appears to be a little bit overlit IMO.
iso100, speed 1/200, ap 14, corr -1/3, with my digital P&S canon ixus 850IS.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Apr 3, 2007, 10:17 PM
Post #2 of 15
(1609 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Well it is a nice pretty mountain picture but where is the human interest element in it. It would be soooo much better if there were a climber in the foreground struggling along a knifeblade ridge with that scenery in the background. As it is you can find this sort of pic on any postcard anywhere and although it is spectacular scenery it leaves me a little ho hum. Give me some human drama and I am right there. It could easily have been taken out the window of an aircraft.
This would be why the photo has bombed in the ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Apr 3, 2007, 11:15 PM
Post #3 of 15
(1608 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
I agree with Phil.. most everything is technically right... just nothing really going on.. geological movement is really tough to capture ;)
perfect stock photo, computer background, framed picture on a wall.. but there is no climbing so unless people were there it's not as interesting to them
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 4, 2007, 12:33 AM
Post #4 of 15
(1605 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
Uninteresting. No real subject, flat lighting, boring sky. Nothing to really do to make it look better, though you might try b/w since there is no real color in it anyway. Not sure what to do next time, but perhaps some different framing, etc. Or something in the foreground to draw the eye with this as the background.
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 4, 2007, 12:53 AM
Post #5 of 15
(1603 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
BTW, in your now locked thread, I thought the bouldering shot was the best of them. A tighter crop, some contrast, and maybe something to kill the overly warm color cast, and it would be 3 out of 5.
|
|
|
|
|
thespider
Apr 4, 2007, 5:44 PM
Post #6 of 15
(1588 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 471
|
I see no real aesthetic pleasure in this pic. The mountain is too close to the top, and the shadow in the bottom is distracting. Nothing leads my eyes anywhere in the photo. I would have moved my frame up and to the right. If you followed the ridge top, from the corner of the frame and got rid of the fluff in the left side, it would be better, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Apr 4, 2007, 6:19 PM
Post #7 of 15
(1583 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
What you say is interesting. I personally thought that the Petites Jorasses - Grandes Jorasses line (the furthest one) and the Périades line (the closest one) joining on one point (the Rochefort - Jorasses summits on the right of the picture) were making this pic visually strong.
The shadows are extremely difficult to avoid in winter time (tall north faces).
"The mountain is too close to the top". Do you mean the "top of the pic"? It's possible and I didn't think of that... I took no other similar pic to compare this one with. By the way, I realise that I kept the habit I had when I shot films (3 months ago...) : I don't shoot a lot, like if I had to spare the 36 shots!
|
|
|
|
|
thespider
Apr 4, 2007, 6:51 PM
Post #8 of 15
(1578 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 471
|
thomasribiere wrote: What you say is interesting. I personally thought that the Petites Jorasses - Grandes Jorasses line (the furthest one) and the Périades line (the closest one) joining on one point (the Rochefort - Jorasses summits on the right of the picture) were making this pic visually strong. The shadows are extremely difficult to avoid in winter time (tall north faces). "The mountain is too close to the top". Do you mean the "top of the pic"? It's possible and I didn't think of that... I took no other similar pic to compare this one with. By the way, I realise that I kept the habit I had when I shot films (3 months ago...) : I don't shoot a lot, like if I had to spare the 36 shots!
Very good points, you have a correct opinion.
I thought that because the furthest line, Grandes Jorasses, was too dark with the shadows to make an impact to my eyes.
The mountain too close to the top is another opinion, I just like to have some more buffer space on the top of a photo, kinda negative space equal to the positive space of the mountains.
This is an example, randomly found from google images:
or
Understand that I am not a professional photographer. Just my opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Apr 5, 2007, 4:56 PM
Post #9 of 15
(1562 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
although I agree whith philbox that a human element will make the shot more interesting for a wider audience, I do enjoy a nice mountain scenery.
It is a nice picture, but there is a blueish color cast. You should try to get the snow look white and bright. I also suggest cropping from the right and leave the peak stand alone. I would like to see either a strong peak alone or a long ridge leading to the peak....
something like this
It is a nice sunny sky, although a good weather to climb, it does not make a good background. What usually works with these types of shots is the sky. Either a nice sunset/rise or a stormy sky.
Also, the sky is a bit noisy, a bit too much for a sunny day with ISO100, I wonder why that is?
(This post was edited by melekzek on Apr 5, 2007, 5:15 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Apr 5, 2007, 5:03 PM
Post #10 of 15
(1558 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
It's weird how the different colors give a different outlook. I don't remember how exactly the rock was, but looking at both pics, I think it was more red than in mine and less than in yours.
It looks like in some places you added some light and not in others. What did you do?
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Apr 5, 2007, 5:18 PM
Post #11 of 15
(1555 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
thomasribiere wrote: It looks like in some places you added some light and not in others. What did you do?
curves, brightness/contrast, a little shadow/highlight, color correction... Only sky is edited seperately to prevent it from overblowing
|
|
|
|
|
thomasribiere
Apr 5, 2007, 5:40 PM
Post #12 of 15
(1552 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Posts: 9306
|
wow... cheater! 
|
|
|
|
|
thespider
Apr 6, 2007, 2:17 PM
Post #13 of 15
(1537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 471
|
I like the changes melekzek did to your photo. I'm immediately drawn into it more than your first post. Post processing is a good thing! 
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Apr 8, 2007, 6:09 AM
Post #14 of 15
(1517 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
thespider wrote: Nothing leads my eyes anywhere in the photo.
exactly! the dark band just above the middle of the frame keeps the eye moving horizontally back and forth, splitting the image into three distinct sections, none of which has anything to lead the eye through it.
It is essentially a two-tone image.... a light band over a dark band over another light band. Nothing to keep the eye within its borders.
If all one wished to look at were a pointy snow covered mountain, I'm sure that much more appealing shots of the same mountain could be googled. But don't hold me to that, its only a guess.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Apr 8, 2007, 6:24 AM
Post #15 of 15
(1516 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
something like this might make a slightly better frame:
something other than a jpeg may have made it easier to crop, as PS constrained my crop tool proportionately.
the light area on the left border has been cropped, the resulting image forces the eye to notice the sunlit knife-edge ridge more closely, drawing the eye in a circular pattern from R>L down the ridge, back L>R up the shaded ridge in the background to the peak, and finally back down the sunlit knife-edge again.
the dark shadow in the foreground now counterbalances the lightness in the sky, providing a diagonal dynamic (adding depth) as well, from bottom right corner to upper left corner and back again.
but then again, maybe that's just me?
edit to add: after reading M's post and viewing his prcessing, I realize I should have started with his image! Nice work, M.
(This post was edited by stymingersfink on Apr 8, 2007, 6:28 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
