Orton - Landscape

Dogdots

Do these work????? I like both of them, but for some reason the first one really grows on me. Hopefully you'll give me your honest opinion -- thanks

1 --




2 --

craig_d

Dogdots wrote:

Hopefully you'll give me your honest opinion

No! I'm going to LIE and tell you that your pictures are horrible!

Seriously, though: I really like these.

For the first one, I sort of wish the tree in the foreground on the right wasn't hanging quite so low, so that there was a little separation between its hanging branches and the other trees.

The second one I suppose could be natural colors, but all that snow against the bright blue sky makes it look oddly like one of those "everything in B&W except one object" pictures (though I can tell the tree trunks are brown). It's still nice, but I wonder how it would look in B&W.

rwells

I'm not really digging the first image. The comp doesn't work for me and the Orton effect is making the limbs just look OOF on this shot. Of course, you did ask for my opinion, YMMV

I really like the second shot. Nice comp, processing and the blue sky plays against all that white nicely. While it might be straight, the shot appears to be a little clockwise crooked. Sometimes I have to adjust a level picture to actual out-of-level just due to what it looks like to our eyes. Again, YMMV


Thanks for posting Mary!

Dogdots

craig_d wrote:

No! I'm going to LIE and tell you that your pictures are horrible!

Seriously, though: I really like these.

For the first one, I sort of wish the tree in the foreground on the right wasn't hanging quite so low, so that there was a little separation between its hanging branches and the other trees.

The second one I suppose could be natural colors, but all that snow against the bright blue sky makes it look oddly like one of those "everything in B&W except one object" pictures (though I can tell the tree trunks are brown). It's still nice, but I wonder how it would look in B&W.

Hi Craig,

I know you wouldn't lie to me -- and that's good

The tree in the foreground I used to shelter the sun when I took it. When I edited it I was hoping the darkness of that tree would seperate it from the others across the river. It was a dumper photo, but thought I'd play around with it some. Guess that's why it's a dumper in the first place

The second one is mostly the natural colors. Frost gives off some funky rainbow kind of colors when the sun hits it. So when editing it I never know what colors it might bring out. Never crossed my mind to do it in BW .. so here it is for you

BW version and straightend too I tried to lighten the shadows, but will need to take some time in doing that later.

craig_d

Hmm. Can you darken the sky a bit (reduce the blue channel) in the B&W version? I think the snow-covered trees need to stand out a bit more.

I may end up thinking the original color was best, but I think a B&W version could be pretty cool too.

It does seem more level now. Randy made a good call on that.

Dogdots

rwells wrote:

I'm not really digging the first image. The comp doesn't work for me and the Orton effect is making the limbs just look OOF on this shot. Of course, you did ask for my opinion, YMMV

I really like the second shot. Nice comp, processing and the blue sky plays against all that white nicely. While it might be straight, the shot appears to be a little clockwise crooked. Sometimes I have to adjust a level picture to actual out-of-level just due to what it looks like to our eyes. Again, YMMV


Thanks for posting Mary!

Howdy Randy --

Not diggin' that first one I told craid_d that it was a dumper photo and I probably shouldn't mess around with dumpers. Lesson learned -- I like it when I learn a lesson without being grounded to my room

Your right about the 2nd photo -- I checked it out and it needed some adjustment -- Thanks

I've been to this place so many times in hopes of finding a herd of deer, but have yet to see even one deer.

I thank you both for all your honest help

Dogdots

craig_d wrote:

Hmm. Can you darken the sky a bit (reduce the blue channel) in the B&W version? I think the snow-covered trees need to stand out a bit more.

I may end up thinking the original color was best, but I think a B&W version could be pretty cool too.

It does seem more level now. Randy made a good call on that.

Sky is darkened. I did try that originally with I did the bw conversion, but tried to keep it from looking to 'stormy'.

craig_d

I like your darkened-sky B&W, but looking at it and the original color version, I think you were right the first time.

black mamba

Well, Mary, it's a darn good thing I don't open my mouth when talking about PP technicalities. Hell, I thought the second shot was done IR.

Tom

Dogdots

craig_d wrote:

I like your darkened-sky B&W, but looking at it and the original color version, I think you were right the first time.

Right the first time -- It was fun trying out the bw version to make sure it was the right choice or not.

Thanks Craig for your insight

Dogdots

black mamba wrote:

Well, Mary, it's a darn good thing I don't open my mouth when talking about PP technicalities. Hell, I thought the second shot was done IR.

Tom

Hi Tom --

Wonder if I could pass it off as an IR photo We'll have to see what Panther/Craig says about that

Thanks for looking Tom and letting me know what you thought

Panther

Howdy Mary,

really love that second one, the sky really works so well with the snow.

Very Nicely Done.

Hmmmm, just saw Tom's post, I like it and with the snow it does have the

appearance of IR with the White Trees, maybe you've started a new IR technique,

Snow/Hoar Frost IR.

Dogdots

Panther wrote:

Howdy Mary,

really love that second one, the sky really works so well with the snow.

Very Nicely Done.

Hmmmm, just saw Tom's post, I like it and with the snow it does have the

appearance of IR with the White Trees, maybe you've started a new IR technique,

Snow/Hoar Frost IR.

Hi Craig --

A new IR technique -- that'll be the day

Looks kinda close, but it's missing that "punch" that an IR camera would give it. Tom was close tho in what he was thinking.

Thank you for commenting and taking a look

Azzaro

Mary K. I like them both......I looked at the first one several times .. Does it look OOF or soft focus.....I kind of went with the last one, soft focus...... I thought the second one looked like and IR also:D azzaro

Dogdots

Azzaro wrote:

Mary K. I like them both......I looked at the first one several times .. Does it look OOF or soft focus.....I kind of went with went the last one, soft focus...... I thought the second one looked like and IR also:D azzaro

Hi Azzaro --

The first one was shot into bright sunlight so it was blown out. I did a light HDR using Topaz and then a mild Orton on it. In other words..I played with it I've attached the orig. photo so you can see what I started with. Not a good shot, but I liked the tree roots poking out and in the trees towards the field there looked like a bird flying. I doubt anything was in focus when I took it except maybe a tiny branch on the 5th tree

The other did look a little like an IR photo -- saves me money on modifing a camera