Mountain landscapes - would love C&C

[terrib]

I took these during a trip to Rocky Mountain National park last fall but didn't even like them enough to present them and request C&C. I've now reprocessed them using Lightroom (was using Aperture before) and I find that I really like them and think they are worthy of spending time to further improve them. So, I would love C&C on all aspects.

My self assessment:

#1 It's the wrong time of day but it is what it is. I like the composition. This has had no cropping done. I probably should have darkened the bright area of the shoreline on the left. I would like to get rid of the blues in the shadows but don't know how to do that in Lightroom without also affecting my water and/or sky color. Is there a way or is this a job for Elements? I've already warmed the WB some.



#2 Again, wrong time of day so I was dealing with a pretty wide tonal range. The mountain is a little flat especially just above the trees. The mountain has been brushed with additional contrast, clarity and a little sharpening which helped a lot - mostly at the top.

[Mike Buckley]

Both photos are definitely keepers even though neither of them is special.

I probably should have darkened the bright area of the shoreline on the left.

That would make a big difference and should probably be easy to do.

I would like to get rid of the blues in the shadows but don't know how to do that in Lightroom without also affecting my water and/or sky color.

The foreground area doesn't bother me except that I might try brightening it a bit. I don't use Lightroom, but wouldn't you be able to select the shadow areas using a brush? You could apply perhaps a Warming slider or something similar. As I mentioned, I would try applying some brightening to that area to determine whether I like it.

Nice job on the second one. Consider darkening the two rear mountains and the sky.

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi Terri,

No it isnt possible to locally adjust colour channels in LR (or at least i cant see how it could be done) it is possible to do a limited amount of adjustments with the adjustment brush, but only those contained within the panel for that brush.

Im not sure that all the adjustments in the world would make these images any better fo me though, in that i think that the problem lies in that there is nothing in either image that leads the eye. the foreground in no 1 needs to be more prominant to make that one work and im not sure that no 2 re composed in any way would help it.

If the light were stronger and more dramatic , these images could have had impact but like you say wrong time of day for that and the sky isnt interesting enough to give different strengths of light.

[Mike Buckley]

i think that the problem lies in that there is nothing in either image that leads the eye

There are no leading lines per se but not all compositions need them to be effective. My take is that the foreground branch in the first one frames the composition nicely. The rear mountains in the second draw my eye to them and the foreground tree on the left makes the scene seem three-dimensional.

[Polar01]

Terri, just a thought, as you are using I believe LR4, why not add a ND gradient to the upper part of the sky to darken it down, and then lighten the whole image to lift the forground. If you have not gone into that part of LR4 before an excellent learning lesson.

Cheers:

Allan

[Radu Dinu Cordeanu]

For Lr:Tone:exp0;contrast0;highlts0;shads+20;whts-59(especially for clouds definition);blacks+78.
Presence:clarity+36;vibr.+33
Tone Curve:highlts-76;darks+7;shads+77.
Luminance:yellow+16;green-100;aqua-100(esp.for uniform the blue of the sky)
Split Toning:Highlights:hue+25;saturation+22;balance-69.
Shadows:hue75;saturation3
Of course these are just an example and a "speedy" opinion about pp .Lr is more deep than that.
Thanks Radu

[terrib]

I do like getting all kinds of feedback because it always makes me take a deeper look at why a photo is working for me but not for someone else. Why is it "nothing special" or "nothing will make them better".

The first image is not one that I would put on my wall but I still like it. The dead trees are too predominant for it to be special and the light is not right. But I probably would not go back to that spot to reshoot even in good light. I don't think I would want to change perspective when shooting to make the foreground more predominant because that would probably cut off some of the reflections that I like. I do like the log at the bottom and I don't think I need leading lines but on looking at it again I did think that I hadn't done a good job of defining the subject - which is the lake. So I've cropped the image to take out more of the uninteresting sky which I think brings the eye down more to the lake and the reflections. I had already used a gradient filter to lighten the foreground and then darkened the entire exposure (opposite approach to Allan) but I went back and reworked it to further lighten the foreground. Below is what I came up with. Is it improved?

Thank you Mike, Mark and Allan for the suggestions that led me to this. Radu, I appreciate you taking the time to rework the photo and present the details on your changes. I'm not sure if it's the difference between your monitor and mine (and I know you are working with a jpeg) but your changes seem to make the entire image more flat and the foreground looks artificial to me. I hope I don't offend you as I appreciate your help.




On the second image, I've tried to decide if my inexperience sees merit where there is none or if it's just a matter of personal taste. On this one, I'm going with personal taste. I would go back and shoot this scene at a different time of day if given the opportunity or maybe later in the year with more snow on the mountain. I agree with Mike that my eye is drawn to the mountain first and then I go back down to appreciate the lake. I like the lily pads and I like the tree with the light hitting it in the foreground.

I took Mike's suggestion to darken the mountains and sky. I think this is about as good as I can do with the light as it was shot. They still feel flat. I also lightened the darkest areas of the lake close to the shoreline just a tad. Again, thanks all for the feedback!!

[Downrigger]

For what it's worth, I think I'd just remove a good bit of the foreground - it gets more of the image than its inherent interest can justify. If you cropped to just above the largest horizontal (big stick/small log) I think it would be more likeable. That little collage on the shore adds unwanted complexity, and, lets face it, is kinda homely.

Good country, nicely remembered here.

[Mike Buckley]

You've done well, Terri. Keeping releasing the shutter and post-processing the images.

[terrib]

Thanks Mark and Mike for the comments.