The Chief & Howe Sound Fjord

[Brownbear]

I'm still working on improving my landscape images hence feedback to improve is truly appreciated.

Processed in Lightroom, and finished in Photoshop CC using curves to adjust highlights and shadows, and an unsharp mask.

The Stawmous Chief

Located in Squamish, BC and a monolith that is favourite with rock climbers... 600 meters tall (2000 feet) and ~ 7-10 km hike

Aperture priority f/16 SS 1/40 ISO 250 Focal Length 95 mm

Version #1


Version #2 (another shot of the same view processed differently)





Mountain View (Howe Sound Fjord)

Aperture Priority

f/16 SS 1/40 ISO 220 Focal Length 22 mm

This image represents my ongoing challenge of trying to capture a big picture view of a mountain. I took several shots from various perspectives but 99% of them will end up being deleted. It's rather frustrating because the scenery is sooo gorgeous!

That said I think I did a good job processing this image in that I am happy with the colours (true to the scene)...




I would be most appreciative of feedback on my compositions, preferences for processing (1st image) and any ideas for compositions for the 2nd image for the next time I have the opportunity to try this scene. I can't get here at sunrise or sunset so the lighting is what it is.

Thank you.

[Geoff F]

Version 2 of The Stawmous Chief has just a fraction more sky which really does make all the difference. It is slightly more muted in colour. Possibly a fraction more highlight brightness and shadow darkening would give move oomph; or a fraction of LCE or one of the other options.

But there is nothing wrong with having a more pastel colour scene like this.

The Fjord looks fine to me; you have created a nice balance which uses all of the natural scenery to best effect.

[Shadowman]

Christina,

Normally you say you want to capture the image as you witnessed it, however in the first two edits there is a marked difference in how the sky is presented. Are you changing your editing process or does one just look better to you than the other?

In the second image presented, the composition works fine for me, I think you need a bit more separation between the foreground hill, lake, and background.

[Mike Buckley]

Good compositions in both of them. The composition of the second one is a good solution for depicting a large scene, which explains why it is so often used. However, in this case, the tree is so tall that it forces you to include more of the sky than is ideal. Get a chain saw and lop off the top of the tree, find a different tree, or find a perspective that allows you to shoot down toward the tree rather than up toward it. (Note that unlike the first solution, the last two solutions will both lessen the weight of your gear and keep you out of jail.)

About the second version of the first image: Lower the white point until the histogram displays data all the way to the right. Raise the black point a little. Then apply an S-curve to increase mid-tone contrast. If you like the overall look, you now know the approach to use. If not, you know not to use that approach. Personally, I would use it. That's because both versions look flat to me.

[Brownbear]

Geoff,

Thank you for the feedback. Yes, it is likely the only time that I haven't included enough sky. I wanted to convey the steepness of the rock-face and sacrificed too much sky. Thank you for letting me know about the soft colours.

John,

The 1st and 3rd image are true to the scene... And I feel like I captured the beauty of the scene in the 1st image. The different edit is me trying to learn to process images more vibrantly but not to saturated for my personal preference. The difference in the sky is from lowering the luminosity of the blues in Lightroom which seems to bring out more detail, and I also darkened the trees (curves) but not the rocks as I wanted the rock face to stand out (the trees were bright). So yes, I'm trying new things out in post processing. And using the curves tool, a lot.

How do I create more separation?

Geoff and John,

With respect to the 2nd image it is simply the best of the bunch or the only one I was able to process with the colours to my liking. I took images from higher up (wider view) without the single tree in the foreground (but more trees in the overall scene) in which the clouds reflected the water which were far prettier, and also closer in but for some reason they just don't work.

Thank you Geoff and John!

[Brownbear]

Thanks Mike.

May I ask what the solution is that I used that is so often used? Or should I say dare I ask since I seem to have tickled your funny bone?

I am going to sit on the 2nd image for a few days. I have one from a lower perspective but yes the tip of the tree is cropped off, and I have one without the tree that might be better but I'm not sure. Anyhow I will be returning to try again, and your tips are helpful. Hopefully I will be able to find this spot again.

1st image, 2nd edit. Here is my try, and I like it. I can see the difference Thank you.



Thank you for letting me know my images look flat, as it is something that I need to know.

Good compositions in both of them. The composition of the second one is a good solution for depicting a large scene, which explains why it is so often used. However, in this case, the tree is so tall that it forces you to include more of the sky than is ideal. Get a chain saw and lop off the top of the tree, find a different tree, or find a perspective that allows you to shoot down toward the tree rather than up toward it. (Note that unlike the first solution, the last two solutions will both lessen the weight of your gear and keep you out of jail.)

About the second version of the first image: Lower the white point until the histogram displays data all the way to the right. Raise the black point a little. Then apply an S-curve to increase mid-tone contrast. If you like the overall look, you now know the approach to use. If not, you know not to use that approach. Personally, I would use it. That's because both versions look flat to me.

[Shadowman]

Geoff,

Thank you for the feedback. Yes, it is likely the only time that I haven't included enough sky. I wanted to convey the steepness of the rock-face and sacrificed too much sky. Thank you for letting me know about the soft colours.

John,

The 1st and 3rd image are true to the scene... And I feel like I captured the beauty of the scene in the 1st image. The different edit is me trying to learn to process images more vibrantly but not to saturated for my personal preference. The difference in the sky is from lowering the luminosity of the blues in Lightroom which seems to bring out more detail, and I also darkened the trees (curves) but not the rocks as I wanted the rock face to stand out (the trees were bright). So yes, I'm trying new things out in post processing. And using the curves tool, a lot.

How do I create more separation?

Geoff and John,

With respect to the 2nd image it is simply the best of the bunch or the only one I was able to process with the colours to my liking. I took images from higher up (wider view) without the single tree in the foreground (but more trees in the overall scene) in which the clouds reflected the water which were far prettier, and also closer in but for some reason they just don't work.

Thank you Geoff and John!

Christina,

Foreground to middle ground can be separated by adjusting the yellow tones/versus the green in the grasses or by adding a bit more contrast between overlapping shapes. Also, there is hardly any tonal change in the water, it could use a bit of gradation from front to back.

[Mike Buckley]

May I ask what the solution is that I used that is so often used?

The foreground tree increases the three-dimensional feeling and provides a sense of scale.

[Brownbear]

John,

Thank you. I will try that, and also the water when I'm ready to try another image.

Mike,

I about the 3-D feeling so nice to know. Thank you.

[JBW]

Hi Christina, I have driven past the Chief (though never climbed it) many times. I was always mightily impressed with how sheer and tall it looked. Neither of the shots bring the sheerness and tallness out for me. I love the twirls and twisting of the rock face you have captured. If I had any advice I would offer it but this is way outside my area of semi expertise.

[Brownbear]

Hi Brian,

Yes, indeed the Chief is a formidable beauty. Thanks for noticing the twirls and the twisting rock face.

You're right. The next time I head out there I will take a few shots from the base (maybe from across the road so I can fit it all in my viewfinder) and perhaps from from a supine position.

Hi Christina, I have driven past the Chief (though never climbed it) many times. I was always mightily impressed with how sheer and tall it looked. Neither of the shots bring the sheerness and tallness out for me. I love the twirls and twisting of the rock face you have captured. If I had any advice I would offer it but this is way outside my area of semi expertise.

[bnnrcn]

I think this version works best Christina

Thanks Mike.

May I ask what the solution is that I used that is so often used? Or should I say dare I ask since I seem to have tickled your funny bone?

I am going to sit on the 2nd image for a few days. I have one from a lower perspective but yes the tip of the tree is cropped off, and I have one without the tree that might be better but I'm not sure. Anyhow I will be returning to try again, and your tips are helpful. Hopefully I will be able to find this spot again.

1st image, 2nd edit. Here is my try, and I like it. I can see the difference Thank you.



Thank you for letting me know my images look flat, as it is something that I need to know.

[Brownbear]

Below is another shot of the Howe Sound Fjord without the tree in front...

I cropped a bit off of the sky, an also the right hand side and bottom to eliminate a bit of the highway seen in the foreground.



Overall I think it is pretty but the scene is beautiful. In hindsight I can see that nicer light is needed to make the scene special. And also to avoid the dark shadows on the mountain tops.

Binnur... Thank you for letting me know your preference. I also processed this image keeping the black and white points in mind, with rich colours.

[Mike Buckley]

This composition is very nice. Though I've taken photos in this kind of light, I agree that special light would have made the photo more special.

The shadows on the mountain tops don't bother me at all. They're shadows of clouds and the clouds are attractive.

We've often discussed reducing the haze. Did you attempt to reduce it? If so, what did you do? If not, why not?

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike. I feel that I'm improving my compositions in big picture landscapes and quickly learning how much nice light is needed. If only I could be here at dawn or dusk.

Good to know.

I didn't think there was much haze on the mountains here (morning after a heavy rainfall) but I expect it is still there to some degree.

Yes, I do recall and if I remember correctly a way to reduce haze is increase the contrast of the mountains and the saturation. I applied a medium contrast curve to the entire image, and I also increased the vibrancy and the saturation of the blue, but I decreased the saturation of the greens because the greens seemed too rich. Which likely means that since the mountains are covered with green trees that the latter was counterproductive to reducing haze?

This composition is very nice. Though I've taken photos in this kind of light, I agree that special light would have made the photo more special.

The shadows on the mountain tops don't bother me a tall. They're shadows of clouds and the clouds are attractive.

We've often discussed reducing the haze. Did you attempt to reduce it? If so, what did you do? If not, why not?

[Mike Buckley]

To reduce haze, I darken and add warmth to the affected area after I have made my global adjustments.

[Shadowman]

Much better separation between foreground, middle, and background on this latest example. You even got a little assistance from turbulent waters and cloud reflections to make the lake look more realistic.

[Wavelength]

very nice images; good colors and composition...

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike, John and Binnur

Mike...

Thank you as always. Here is the edit... I also cropped it a little differently as I was not fond the patch on the mountains on the right hand side. I decided to post it here instead of replacing the other image so others can learn from this too.



John, Thank you for letting me know that. It's actually the ocean but in a passage way. The waters are a beautiful blue green and usually calm.

[bnnrcn]

What do you mean by saying 'darken' Mike ? Decreasing the exposure ?

To reduce haze, I darken and add warmth to the affected area after I have made my global adjustments.