Wildflowers Columbia Hills

chrismoore

Some wildflowers at sunset in the Columbia Hills region. Two shots hand blended, one for foreground, one for sky. It took me a few attempts to get a rendering that I was happy with. Critiques welcome. Thanks for looking!

dogwood

Very nice! Love the composition. One thing though-- the transition from sky to earth seems a little abrupt. Maybe that's because I'm used to shooting with an ND grad filter which seems to make a smoother transition?

Sexy6Chick

Wow! I LOVE this!!

Joie

Cool photo! Did you use a fish eye lens?

hawkeye978

Chris,

Beautiful foreground, beautiful background. I love the clouds and the sunburst. It gives a great feel along with the bright sharp colors from the flowers.

It could be my eye but the two regions feel a little disconnected. Maybe the light was that way but the lupines in front seem a little too bright for the darker background. Maybe a dodge layer with a gradient mask to change the transition? Also, is the bright line on the ridge just below the sun from backlighting?

Doug Solis

Love it! great color, the sun rays work very well and really nice job with the blend.

redleash

Chris - I think you've done a nice job with the blend. It does seem a tad bit disconnected, as Tom says. I wonder if you could brighten the hills just a bit, rather than darkening the lupines--I really like the way the purple pops in the foreground! Please post any revisions so we can take a look. I love the comp and the sunburst!

Lauren

chrismoore

Thanks for the critiques. It was shot with a 16-35 at 16mm. I think the big problem both for me processing, and for the viewer, is that there were about 7 or 8 stops of difference between the sky and foreground, so that even when exposed properly it looks abrupt. The main elements I wanted to preserve were the sunburst and the bright vibrance of the flowers from the backlighting of the sun. I'll take a look at the RAW files again and see what I can do. Thanks again!

redleash

If your goal was to preserve the sunburst and the vibrance of the flowers, then you hit it spot on, IMO!

Marc Muench

chrismoore wrote: »

Thanks for the critiques. It was shot with a 16-35 at 16mm. I think the big problem both for me processing, and for the viewer, is that there were about 7 or 8 stops of difference between the sky and foreground, so that even when exposed properly it looks abrupt. The main elements I wanted to preserve were the sunburst and the bright vibrance of the flowers from the backlighting of the sun. I'll take a look at the RAW files again and see what I can do. Thanks again!

The issue seems to be the dark mountains.Try keeping everything up to the skyline the same tone.

chrismoore

ok, i tried to even it out a bit, recovering some shadows and some levels adjustments. its kind of subtle and hard to even notice much of a difference with the low res version, but i had to avoid introducing noise and such which could butcher it altogether. thanks for the help.

DaddyO

Despite the this's or that's I really like the direction your going with the piece.
Foreground interest is wonderful. But then, so is the total scene.

jimqjr

I think this is an incredible photo.
Thanks for sharing. For me it is inspiring.

chrismoore wrote: »

ok, i tried to even it out a bit, recovering some shadows and some levels adjustments. its kind of subtle and hard to even notice much of a difference with the low res version, but i had to avoid introducing noise and such which could butcher it altogether. thanks for the help.

chrismoore

Thanks guys. Appreciate the nice comments.

astrostu

Very cool.

CWSkopec

Gorgeous image, Chris!

Even though the changes may be subtle, I do like the second version better. I do however see a slight halo at the edge of the mountains in the background, just under the sun star. I think eliminating that would be a huge improvement.

Despite that, excellent job processing this image!
I've got shots from last summer with a similar issue in dynamic range that haven't made it off my hard drive yet because I can't figure out how I'd like them to look.

chrismoore

CWSkopec wrote: »

Gorgeous image, Chris!

Even though the changes may be subtle, I do like the second version better. I do however see a slight halo at the edge of the mountains in the background, just under the sun star. I think eliminating that would be a huge improvement.

Despite that, excellent job processing this image!
I've got shots from last summer with a similar issue in dynamic range that haven't made it off my hard drive yet because I can't figure out how I'd like them to look.

Thanks! Yeah I'm aware of that halo, and of course its driving me crazy since thats one of the reasons I don't use hDR programs. Getting rid of it would be tricky, and for that reason plus some other technical issues this shot would never be one to enlarge much. I did take many shots during the 30 min the sun was setting and covered the dynamic range, but the sunburst was only shootable for a minute or so. Proper exposure for foreground was 1/30, and sky 1/800 (at ISO 800 f/18). huge! I'm happy with the comp, but this shot has taught me a lot, not so much in terms of processing, but in thinking through all these issues while in the field.

grimace

Great looking shot and wonderful work in post!!

redleash

I like the new version, even with subtle changes. It is an incredible scene and you've done a great job with the PP. I just visited your web site--hadn't been there for a while--and I really like it!

Great job, Chris!

Lauren

coscorrosa

Nice work Chris, that last version is my favorite. I love the diffraction stars on the 16-35, I wish more lenses had an odd number of aperture blades.