A few shots of the Grand Canyon

Cornflake

My primary goal was to take infrared photos, but I took a few in color. Feedback is always valued.

1

2

3

4

5

jkcothron

Wonderful images, love all the texture and light. I think 1 or 2 would be my favorite, but they are all good.

Eia

I REALLY want to see no. 2 in color! Still - It is **fantastic **in your b/w version. The lighting is awesome. All of them are so dramatic but 2 & 4 stand out. No. 4 has a variety of texture with rugged detail in the foreground but rather 'smooth' in the farther cliffs - still keeping the appearance of the ruggedness. Is this a recent shoot? I see snow in the last...didn't know if it has melted away by now...

Cornflake

jkcothron, AnnaMaria, thank you both. Since number 2 is an infrared shot, the color version isn't much. Here it is SOOC.

These were shot Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning. There was a little snow on Monday, as well as a hard wind that had me muttering.

I'm gratified that you both like number 2. It rang my bell but I suspected that I might be alone.

Juano

I agree with the previous comments. I like 3 a lot too.

Stumblebum

Great set!

Cornflake

Cristobal, Taz, thanks very much.

[Deleted User]

The b/w versions are great. May be the shades in no. 2 is a little dominating, but it's still a fine photo.

roaddog52

Great set! #1 is a big "wow" for me. So much going on, great tones, clouds, shapes, texture, geological structure. I'd print and frame this one. #2 is nice also.

Phil

black mamba

Great stuff, Don. Your B&W work sure puts the subject in a different light....no pun intended. #1 is exceptionally attention-grabbing.

Take care,

Tom

Cornflake

"The b/w versions are great. May be the shades in no. 2 is a little dominating, but it's still a fine photo."

Thanks, Jorgen. I see what you mean about number 2 and I may tinker with it.

"Great set! #1 is a big "wow" for me. So much going on, great tones, clouds, shapes, texture, geological structure. I'd print and frame this one. #2 is nice also."

Phil, thank you very much.

"Your B&W work sure puts the subject in a different light....no pun intended. #1 is exceptionally attention-grabbing."

Tom, one characteristic of infrared comes in very handy at the Grand Canyon. When you're photographing rocks, infrared doesn't change the tones all that much. But infrared cuts through atmospheric obstructions much better than visible light does. There's a lot of haze, dust and pollution at the canyon and when a scene is miles across, it can be a problem for a standard camera. Infrared can produce a lot more clarity. I appreciate your comment.

jkcothron

I have a 5D body that I'm not using anymore. I've been considering getting it converted to infrared because it really interests me. Do you have any recommendations regarding that process?

Cornflake

John, I would urge anyone considering this to make sure the camera has live view. Infrared doesn't focus like visible light. The only way to make sure you're getting sharp focus is to focus manually in live view. Similarly, exposure meters are designed for visible light and are not always accurate with infrared. Live view doesn't entirely solve that problem but I think it helps. When getting a conversion, you'll have to choose which filter to have permanently installed. People who like color infrared shots may want a filter that captures some visible light as well as infrared. I don't care for color infrared and have ordered the black and white filter, which blocks all visible light and only captures the near infrared spectrum.

I suspect that most infrared cameras wind up gathering dust. You might check out a few books about infrared photography before going to the expense. The gee whiz factor wears off quickly. Do you photography any subjects that would benefit from infrared? Many desert scenes do. Oddly, nudes do. I read a beautiful book on infrared nudes by a woman photographer. In my opinion, scenes with a lot of greenery often turn into white blobs, but tastes vary. FWIW.

jkcothron

Thank you, what you said gives me several things to consider for a while. I do know I wouldnt want color infrared. I knew there was a focus issue but I wasnt sure how people got around it. Liveview makes sense. The 5D doesnt have that but I also have a 5D2 that does. i would have to think a little harder about converting that one though.

I wouldnt definitely be shooting vegetation but I quite like the white look. I also shoot a lot of rocky landscapes though, and from what I have seen that can be very interesting as well.

Again I appreciate the feedback!

black mamba

Of interest to those who are practicing or considering infrared photography, I will mention a source of info and help you might not be familiar with. Craig Kirk, who was once very active on Dgrin, created his own forum, developed exclusively for infrared shooters. I understand that it has been a very successful forum....somewhere north of 2,500 participants. I can't remember the name of his forum but if anyone is interested I'll be happy to find it for you. A lot of Craig's stuff was exceptionally good. The man knows infrared.

Tom

Cornflake

Tom, I'd be interested. I checked to see if a quick Google search might find it but for me it didn't.

Edit: John, our public library has a handful of books on infrared photography, most of which are poor. The best by far is Laurie Klein and Kyle Klein, Infrared photography : artistic techniques for brilliant images. Laurie Klein in particular is an excellent and imaginative photographer who uses infrared for creative advantage, not just for stunt value. It's probably on Kindle.

black mamba

Don,

I couldn't find Craig's forum name but I'll give you his email address. He's a terrific guy and I'm sure he wouldn't mind hearing from you. I know that the effort of running the forum was beginning to wear on him and he may have made some operational changes. His email address is " c.kirk@att.net ". Tell Craig that the " old rascal " told you to touch base with him. He's the kind of man who will do anything to help you. Good luck.

Tom

Cornflake

Tom, you old rascal, I will definitely send him an email. Thanks very much.

KellyRae

pretty!

pathfinder

I really like how the IR images cut through the haze of the long distances in these images. The color images tend to the bluish due to the haze.

I also favor #2.

I think #1 might benefit from a little more light in the sky - the whites in the clouds are a bit grey to my taste. The tones in the sky in #3 are significantly brighter.

Cornflake

KellyRae, pathfinder, thank you both for commenting.

"I think #1 might benefit from a little more light in the sky - the whites in the clouds are a bit grey to my taste. The tones in the sky in #3 are significantly brighter." I agree. I'm having second thoughts about my whole approach to that one and may redo it.

I decided that Jorgen was right about the shadows in number 2 and redid it. I think it's an improvement.

jkcothron

I like them both, with the original being a tad more dramatic... not the the edit isn't wonderful as well. It really shows the texture better and you still have the great light.