Bad HDR shot of the day

Oh, good. Another many square mile array that will provide maybe 1/100
the power of the average nuke plant. At least the "pro-alternative
energy" liberals won't suddenly have to object to it like they did the
offshore wind turbines in Martha's Vinyard.

 

But they will probably object to the construction of the thermally
powered 'spinning reserve' required to maintain the power supply
between wind gusts.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

 

I meant to ask...what do you think of the two versions? It's your
photo. Which do you prefer?

 

To me a landscape need not have an extraneous object. The entire scene
itself can be interesting if done right. I am the first to admit that a
lot of my own landscape images may need that "Indian in a red canoe," to
add a center of interest. But, many do not need that extraneous object.
As for HDR, I personally do not like the HDR effect, which can be an art
form all by itself. I have already posted HDR images to the SI. In any
that I posted I have used HDR simply to extend the dynamic range.

 

Sorry, that is an image of a tractor. I would have toned down the
tractor and worked with the background to eliminate the haze. Rather
than show an image of a tractor, it then becomes an image of a field,
that happens to have a tractor in it.

 

I am pretty open minded when it comes to my stuff. I have several sets
of multi-exposure shots of that tractor, taken from different angles
that day. I am always prepared to return to an rework almost anything
to see if I can reach a better result.
That said, I felt the version with the darker overcast made for a more
dramatic image of the entire scene, adding to the sense of desolation
of the place, and it was one which I like.
The version using your suggestion opened a different mindset for me, to
emphasize the tractor, as opposed to the entire scene, and I find that
pleasing as well, but I am still biased toward my initial version.
....but I could tone it down a hair. It's all an ongoing work without a
final version yet.

 

I don't see why you should feel any need to make an excuse for
expressing an opinion. I have never seen any comment of yours that is
intended to belittle and that is not an honest opinion.

 

Not to me he doesn't. No justification for comments required.
Tony has his taste and opinions, and his comments on my work I find
thought provoking. That can lead me in different directions. There are
certainly times I could be aimed down a different path. Just another
reason I enjoy the SI.
It is also good to have a reasonably thick skin. ;-)

....and I won't add another shot of that tractor cluttering up all that
open space.

 

Yup! Almost all well intentioned comments some food for thinking,
especially when they disagree with the POV in my images.

I don't want to start a war, but I may very well have a thicker skin
than you
Peter

 

What really does help is some foreground. That's why the tractor scene
was more interesting than the distant Yosemite scene. The black and
white Yosemite scene is full of mid-ground, not just an empty foreground.

Here's a link that was posted in alt.photography with foreboding skies
in Holland: http://www.hetijssellandschap.nl/
I guess that's HDR? They have the blacks in the sky but don't seem to
have that wiry-edged bright shadow detail that so many overdone HDR
shots have, which looks so unreal. Interesting maybe but not real: surreal.

The compositions in these Dutch landscapes are a bit jumbled but the use
of foreground is dramatic and effective, especially for basically flat
landscapes.

 

I think you've interpreted the comments the wrong way. The image
started out as a photograph of a tractor in a field. The comments
were not about whether or not the tractor was needed, but where the
emphasis should be placed in the processing.

I commented about the initial composition saying that I'd either
compose tighter on the tractor and make it a tractor shot or move back
and make it a landscape shot with the tractor minimalized. I didn't
say anything about needing the tractor in the shot. The HDR treatment
of the tractor-only works well with the rest of the image looking more
natural.

I did say that a photograph does need a feature to be interesting (as
opposed to a bunch of rocks and trees), but that doesn't mean it needs
an extraneous object. I've seen some marvelous landscape shots taken
in the desert, but they've featured a particular formation, cacti,
sunrise/sunset, or other non-extraneous aspect.

 

I really don't see that working. The tractor is too prominent in the
image to make it an image of a field that happens to have a tractor in
it. To make it that - which could work out very well - the photograph
would have to have been taken with the photographer 50 to 100 yards
back.

However, we can't re-take the photograph unless this field and tractor
happens to be in the Duck's back yard. What we can do is work on the
processing with what we have.

 

It doesn't hurt to remind people that we do like their other stuff
even though we are taking issue with one particular image. I'm
sensitive to criticism of my images, and assume everyone else is.

Typically, my reaction to criticism of my images is first thinking
"Idiot! I like it better my way", and then I look again and start
thinking "Hey, that might work better after all", or - at the very
least - "I should have considered that".

The only person I could never both pan and praise was Sisker. I never
found one to praise.

 

In some respects we are strangely of like mind. ;-)

 

It's funny, but when someone says "That image is crap" about one of
mine, I let it roll off and don't pay any attention. But, when they
say "I like the image, but you should have..." and make a small
correction, I bristle. I then start re-assessing the photo to force
myself to view the correction as a neutral observer.

 

Then you should be able to tolerate this;
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC1000_HDRw.jpg >

 

Good stuff. At least in this one the horizon is level.

 

Its amazing what a comma can do .....

" I have never seen any comment of yours that is intended to
belittle, and that is not an honest opinion."

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

 

That's strange, because of the San Andreas Fault running through
Carrizo Plain just about the only thing that is level out there is Soda
Lake.

Take a look at what the an Andreas does to Hwy. 58 as it runs across Carrizo.
It turns it into a real roller coaster.
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC0924w.jpg >

 

I try to pan or praise images, not people. (Except of course, if the
people become obnoxious.)