Acadia National Park brought back great memories

Dixie · June 16, 2016

It has been a long, long time since I've been active on DG. I am going to try and get back into the swing of things and spend more time here in the future. If anyone is interested, I was going through and re-working some of the photos from the DG 2009 Shootout at Acadia National Park in Maine and I got homesick. Here are some experiments I did with a few of the photos from the shootout. Two are HDR renditions of two different shots of the Bass Harbor Lighthouse and the other a Black & White version. Comments and suggestions are always welcomed. The first color image below was shot about hour or so after the second color image. The BW image was generated from the first color image below.

Stumblebum · June 16, 2016

Hi Richard, in my view, the first and last shot work! Lovely Comp!
However, you have some halos in top right in first and very pronounced in the middle of tree and and house going towards the sky. Even b&w is showing that.
Maybe some effort is require to disguise them.
Cheers!

Dixie · June 18, 2016

Thank you for your input.

Hikin' Mike · June 18, 2016

Nice shots and I prefer the B&W without the halos.

David_S85 · June 18, 2016

Hi, Dixie! Welcome back to Dgrin

I also prefer the B&W over the color images above. I was just up in that area (again - since 2009) a few days ago, but only got as far north as Portland.

Dixie · June 18, 2016

Thanks, Mike and David. I am partial to the B&W as well. I normally put my favorite as the last one. Good to be back. Looking forward to getting involved again. It has been a while and I am looking forward to doing more new work as well.

This is another of my B&W shots which I thought turned out well.

Cavalier · June 19, 2016

Beautiful shots and processing, Dixie. Do you mind if I ask what you use to combine and process your HDR?

Dixie · June 19, 2016

Acadia National Park brought back great memories

Cavalier wrote: »

Beautiful shots and processing, Dixie. Do you mind if I ask what you use to combine and process your HDR?

I use the Google Nik HDR EFEX Pro 2 which is part of the original Nik Software package which was bought out by Google. You could get it free so I hope that you still can if you are interested. I found this link and it appears that it is still free. You want to get the entire collection. Of the collection I use Color EFEX Pro 4, HDR EFEX Pro 2, Viveza 2 and for my B&W conversions, I use Silver EFEX Pro 2. They all come with the complete collection.

Google Nik Collection

I picked out a pretty plain exposure which I have never done anything with previously because I didn't particularly like the image. I figured it would help to show the results of the HDR, Color EFEX and Silver EFEX Pro 2 to help save some previously discarded shots.

1. From the Original RAW image - no RAW pre-processing and only used the EFEX software for all subsequent renditions.

2. HDR EFEX Pro 2

3. Silver EFEX Pro 2 (B&W Conversion)

If you have specific questions about any of the processes just let me know. There are some way out presets for both the HDR and Silver EFEX action sets, but I pretty much stick to the more realistic presets (they are pre-identified in the software). I use the Color EFEX for general overall adjustments for contrast, color, graduated filters, etc. and Viveza for area adjustments within an individual image - supports multiple adjustments in different areas in one image. You can save the adjustments as custom presets so you don't have to keep doing the adjustments over and over if you have a particular look you are going for with a number of images. Please let me know if you have any further questions.

NOTE: HDR EFEX Pro 2 will work with only one image. I don't know if it works with multiple images or not because I've never tried it. From what I understand, the software creates a couple of underexposed and overexposed images to work with to create the final HDR image. I like that feature because I never shoot multiple images specifically to do HDR imaging.

Cavalier · June 20, 2016

Dixie, thanks for answering my question with such great information. I actually did download the Nik collection when I saw a post that they were discontinuing and were giving it for free, but I haven't used it as yet. I will certainly play with it now! Thanks again.

Dixie · June 20, 2016

Jo, you are most certainly welcomed. I've been using Nik Color EFEX since 2004 (12 years) starting with version 1. I found my serial number e-mail from when I upgraded to ver 2 in 2005. By default the program opens when you open the Adobe product that you installed the Nik software for. You can go into the settings and set it not to open automatically and then when you need one of the Nik filters just select it from the Filters dropdown. I can't remember whether the install defaults to changing the current layer or opens a new layer for the changes. Double check that and make sure it opens in a new layer so if it goes south on you, you can just delete the layer instead of having to revert and start over.

I wish the install would just let you install it once and have a screen to pick ALL compatible Adobe products, but regretfully, you have to run a separate install for each program you wish to use it with. I installed mine in all compatible Adobe software. The reason for the separate installs is because Adobe requires that all Nik plug-ins be in the individual Adobe software being supported. I have no problems having Nik installed on all versions.

Again, if you have any further questions just give me a shout.

Here is the selection screen from the install. Yours will show all compatible Adobe software on your computer.

Eia · June 20, 2016

Well - actually I think the first two work. They look like they belong on a book cover. Don't disregard them!!! The way you processed them tell a story regardless of some of the nits. The paddle wheel -- from WV?

Dixie · June 20, 2016

Eia wrote: »

Well - actually I think the first two work. They look like they belong on a book cover. Don't disregard them!!! The way you processed them tell a story regardless of some of the nits. The paddle wheel -- from WV?

Thank you very much. I don't tend to get bothered by negative comments. I know what I am going for and that is what satisfies me. ...and another more standard version of No. 2 was on the cover of the DGrin 2009 Shootout cover.

I tend to take a photograph like I am doing a painting (Fine Art Major with a minor in Photography) and actually set my camera based on what I envision the final print looking like rather than trying to accurately duplicating the scene. I will leave accurately duplicating a scene to the forensic photographer because they have to for evidentiary purposes. Me, I take an artistic approach and try to envision what could be rather than what it necessary is. Sometimes, technical critique is correct, but secondary to the goal one is working on. Is I must place emphasis and make a decision between technical and aesthetic - I will normally go with the aesthetic.

Thanks again for your very kind comments and you hit my philosophy head on with "...tell a story." ...and some stories are fiction.

Book cover (and I do like my latest version the best):

...and the mill is Mabry Mill at mile post 176 on the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia.

Dixie · June 20, 2016

Eia wrote: »

........ The paddle wheel -- from WV?

This may be the mill you are thinking about in West Virginia. It is Glade Creek Grist Mill located in
Babcock State Park south of Charleston, WV.

Glade Creek Grist Mill

I've also shot all the covered bridges in WV.

Stumblebum · June 21, 2016

The first shot of Mabry Mill.....is beyond description! Like no words can capture how beautiful that is!

Dixie · June 21, 2016

Stumblebum wrote: »

The first shot of Mabry Mill.....is beyond description! Like no words can capture how beautiful that is!

Thank you. It has always been one of my personal favorites.

Celtic Snapper · June 25, 2016

I like all three. No 2 looks most natural. Building looks a little bright to me in number 1 which makes it looked more artificial and overly tampered with. I would try and tone it down more to the illumination you' d expect in that morning/evening light, or do a local white balance adjustment and add some orangey warmth. Just my opinion - striking images regardless!

Dixie · June 26, 2016

Celtic Snapper wrote: »

I like all three. No 2 looks most natural. Building looks a little bright to me in number 1 which makes it looked more artificial and overly tampered with. I would try and tone it down more to the illumination you' d expect in that morning/evening light, or do a local white balance adjustment and add some orangey warmth. Just my opinion - striking images regardless!

Thanks again.

Hawthy · June 26, 2016

I really like the dramatic composition of the Acadia shots. I would love to see them presented more naturally. The most recent shot is my favourite. HDR is an artistic choice though, so go crazy if that is your wont.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Dixie · June 26, 2016

Hawthy wrote: »

I really like the dramatic composition of the Acadia shots. I would love to see them presented more naturally. The most recent shot is my favourite. HDR is an artistic choice though, so go crazy if that is your wont.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you - each to his own I say. HDR is something that people either seem to hate or love. Scott Kelby summed it up nicely and it is the reason that I do them, ….non-photographers absolutely love them! I tend to see this when I post them on non-photographically oriented sites and see the comments that I receive. I also tend to bow to the buying customer.

Scott Kelby's full HDR article is located here:

http://scottkelby.com/the-case-for-hdr/

Hawthy · June 27, 2016

Dixie wrote: »

Thank you - each to his own I say. HDR is something that people either seem to hate or love. Scott Kelby summed it up nicely and it is the reason that I do them, ….non-photographers absolutely love them! I tend to see this when I post them on non-photographically sites with the comments that I receive. I also tend to bow to the buying customer.

Scott Kelby's full HDR article is located here:

http://scottkelby.com/the-case-for-hdr/

Good post. It is hard to argue with Scott Kelby's observation that non-photographers absolutely love HDR. I was positively agog when I first saw HDR images. They changed a “meh” to a “Wow!”. And in a world awash with digital images, well, one needs something extra to stand out.
Processing is an art within an art. So, if your artistic bent lies towards saturated HDR images that is fine. I admire people who can produce a good HDR image, which you obviously can.
There are people who refuse to process images at all, which I think is a lot crazier than HDR. But as you said, each to their own.

Dixie · June 28, 2016

Acadia National Park brought back great memories
There is one other thing that I should have mentioned. I have these printed on canvas 10x15 up to 20x30 and many think they are paintings instead of photos. ...and that is the look I am going for.

This is one of the earlier versions of the HDR print on canvas and framed.

fool4thecity · July 5, 2016

Not a big HDR guy, love the B&W one though! Black clouds in HDR?

MJoliat · July 5, 2016

I really like the color of the sky in #1, but one thing that struck me about the difference between #1 and #2 is the color of the wall with the 3 windows in it. In #1, the sky is really a deep, rich color, but the color on that wall is very light. In #2, the sky is much lighter, but the color on that wall is much more like I would have expected it to be in #1. Also the wicked halos around the trees in #1 are a bit distracting.

Dixie · August 1, 2016

MJoliat wrote: »

I really like the color of the sky in #1, but one thing that struck me about the difference between #1 and #2 is the color of the wall with the 3 windows in it. In #1, the sky is really a deep, rich color, but the color on that wall is very light. In #2, the sky is much lighter, but the color on that wall is much more like I would have expected it to be in #1. Also the wicked halos around the trees in #1 are a bit distracting.

In number 1, the sun was still above the horizon. In number 2, the sun was below the horizon. The lighthouse faces to the south and the sun was setting to the southwest.