Learning Landscapes - Skies and Mountains

[Brownbear]

The sky was beautiful this morning. In the following images I tried to capture that beauty. I think my focus and DOF is fine in these images but would appreciate hearing if that is not the case.

Processed in LR, with some lightening of the trees in the foreground.

All Aperture Priority ISO 100

My favourite for the light and the star sun...

#1

SS 1/160 Exp Comp -1.33




#2

SS 1/80 Exp Comp -.67

SS

#3 Here I was playing with the composition, rule of thirds but I'm not sure if it works.

SS 1 60 Exp Comp -.67



#4

SS 1/15 Exp Comp +.67




#5 In this particular image the sky seems too blue and some of the clouds over the mountains look a bit odd but post processing was minimal, except for increasing the vibrancy to +30, perhaps that was too much.

I focused on the mountain peak covered in clouds thinking that the other mountains would lead the eye to this peak... Something about this photo doesn't work and I'm not sure why...

SS 1/50 Exp Comp +.33



I would appreciate some general feed back on images 1-4, ie; like or not.... and some more constructive feedback on image #5 because something is not quite right and I would like to try this one again.

[rpcrowe]

All are very nice but #2 is my favorite because of the wisps of blowing clouds against the dark trees.

[ShaneS]

I'm with Richard on #2. Seeing your images makes my miss my hometown, the crisp fall days and lovely scenery Must be time for a visit!

Just out of curiosity where are you shooting from?

[Stagecoach]

Hi again Christina,

I like all the images and as for No 5, if you feel the blue is too much, pull it down.

As always I will be honest in my assessment and as you well know I'm also learning. Some of these and the waterfall images (forgetting the silkiness factor) appear flat to me and I'm sure there is a lot more potential there with improved basic PP work.

From your recent landscape threads and mine one of the areas I have taken on is to seriously start working with curves having only used levels before. This has made a very big difference to what I can now achieve with my images containing interesting skies and greenery and I'm not looking for the over-processed unreal look.

As for sharpening I'm still basically following the Colin Southern procedure although I'm aware of other methods but I have found that my concerns regarding the work I do are not the sharpening.

Have you considered using curves?

Grahame

[Bobobird]

#2 for me too though all are good in their own way.

About #2, one minor niggle is that the top cloud is a bit too overpowering and is taking something away from the wonderful misty scene in the lower half.

[Loose Canon]

Hey Christina!

When you bring you really bring it!

These are great. All of them.

The last one I really love. Reminds me of a lot of classic shots I have seen of Everest.

The first one? What was your aperture?

I have an idea because you nailed a fave effect (for me anyway) that I think is very cool to have in the Bag 'O Tricks!

[Hui Song]

Nice images. You are really working hard on photography.
About the composition, IMHO, you do not need to keep the same proportion as they are out from the camera. Be free to corp it to whatever you like.

I corp a little bit for #2, #3 & #4 to bring viewer's attention to the wisps of blowing clouds against the dark trees. Here are they:

[jcuknz]

I like two if you crop the top 40% off. Hui Song is getting there but not enough.The essential is the mist in the trees and the top 40% is just a distraction because that is what the camera gave you. Cropping through the dark cloud gives a vignette effect without the artificiality of an imposed vignette.

[Kaye Leggett]

I like your shots as they are, i.e. without the crop. You get more of the sense of the scale of the landscape you are in. Like you not sure about image 5 - ironically have you tried a crop on this one - putting the mountain peak on the rule of thirds and losing a bit of the sky perhaps ?

[pasusan]

Hi Christina - Have you tried moving the images around in the Lightbox to see how different cropping effects can work with the images? I love doing that to see how different crops might affect the image. For me #2 would definitely improve by cropping the top off leaving just the bottom of the dark cloud, I think as jcuknz advocates. And cropping down #5 to just get rid of that little puffy distracting cloud and some of the top sky... But these are just suggestions as I think all these images are very nice!

[Brownbear]

Thank you to all for your comments and suggestions. The light was gorgeous and it's very nice to hear that I captured it.

Richard, thank you. I liked the wispy clouds, too.

Shane, these were photographed on the North Shore in Lynn Valley, a beautiful area located between Capilano and Lynn Valley, both large beautiful regional parks. The Baden Powell trail runs through those mountains extending from Deep Cove to Horseshoe Bay. (48 km, 20 hour hike)

Bobo, Susan, Hui, Photo Nut and Kaye...

Thank you for all the cropping suggestions. I think I was so focused on the getting the composition just right when taking the photograph, focused on the overall scene that I was hesitant to crop these but I like the crops. Hui, thank you so much for taking the time to show me your versions which I like, a lot.

Susan and Kaye,

Yes, I should and will try moving my images around in the box to see the different versions. I will try your suggestions. Thank you for sharing.

While reading last night I learned the reason for my overly blue sky and funny cloud. I used a polarizing filter to take these images and while for most of the images the sun was at 90 degrees but for the last image the sun was at my back, so I should've taken the filter off for this shot. I didn't realize that the filter effected the sky so much but I knew something wasn't quite right.

[Brownbear]

Hi Grahame,

Thank you. Yes, the intense blue was caused by my use of a polarizing filter, and I will try and pull it down in PP.

I agree. Improving my post processing skills is something that I am working on and will be dedicating more time to as the long rainy spells are overdue in Vancouver, perfect weather for post-processing.

For these images I did use the curve tool, albeit very lightly, just a wee pull on one, or both ends... Likely not aggressive enough to make much of a difference. Yes, I'm familiar with Colin's technique and will review and try it again. For these images with so much sky and clouds in them I thought that sharpening should be minimal if at all, but I will play with them and see how they look.

Thank you.

Hi again Christina,

I like all the images and as for No 5, if you feel the blue is too much, pull it down.

As always I will be honest in my assessment and as you well know I'm also learning. Some of these and the waterfall images (forgetting the silkiness factor) appear flat to me and I'm sure there is a lot more potential there with improved basic PP work.

From your recent landscape threads and mine one of the areas I have taken on is to seriously start working with curves having only used levels before. This has made a very big difference to what I can now achieve with my images containing interesting skies and greenery and I'm not looking for the over-processed unreal look.

As for sharpening I'm still basically following the Colin Southern procedure although I'm aware of other methods but I have found that my concerns regarding the work I do are not the sharpening.

Have you considered using curves?

Grahame

[Brownbear]

Hey Christina!

When you bring you really bring it!

These are great. All of them.

The last one I really love. Reminds me of a lot of classic shots I have seen of Everest.
Hi Terry,

Thank you. Truly appreciated.

Aperture F22 for the 1st image, F18 for the others and F11 for #4.




The first one? What was your aperture?

I have an idea because you nailed a fave effect (for me anyway) that I think is very cool to have in the Bag 'O Tricks!

[Manfred M]

Yes, the intense blue was caused by my use of a polarizing filter, and I will try and pull it down in PP.

Best thing to do is to pull it down in your shot. I will often look for the maximum polarizing effect while composing and then turn my filter back a touch (in the 1/8th turn range). That beats try to fix your skies in post.

[Brownbear]

Hi Manfred,

The filter is a twist on filter I don't understand what you mean by turning the filter but it sounds like you are saying that in certain positions the polarizing effect is lessened? I have one 2nd hand polarizing filter and one new polarizing filter, neither one came with a users manual.

Thank you.

Best thing to do is to pull it down in your shot. I will often look for the maximum polarizing effect while composing and then turn my filter back a touch (in the 1/8th turn range). That beats try to fix your skies in post.

[Mike Buckley]

It's great to see photos that turned out so much better due to your control rather than luck. Your recent photos show a consistently higher quality.

About polarizers:

It's fine to leave the polarizer on when the sun is to your back and any advice to the contrary can be very misleading. (That assumes that the reduced amount of light entering the lens is not problematic.) It's not just the angle of the sun to your camera that is important; it's also the angle of reflected surfaces relative to the sun and the camera that are also important. That's because the light's angle of entry onto a surface is equal to the angle of exit. (There are two terms other than "entry" and "exit" that are usually used but I can't think of what they are at the moment.)

Though the sky probably won't be affected by the polarizer when the sun is to your back and though other surfaces may not be affected as much as in other situations, it's possible that some glare on the surfaces of shiny materials such as leaves can be somewhat minimized even in that situation.

Hold the part of the polarizer that screws onto the lens in your fingers without touching the other part. Alternatively, attach the filter snugly onto a lens. Then turn the element itself separately from the part that screws into the lens. That's the control that Manfred mentioned.

The results of that control are most easily seen when you point the camera toward the blue part of the sky when the sun is low and 90 degrees to your right. Turn the polarizer in that situation and you'll see the color of the sky magically change in your viewfinder. Similarly, avoid the sky and instead point the camera to leaves of grass or leaves on trees. Slowly turn the polarizer and suddenly at one point most of the "colorless" glare disappears, revealing the color and texture in the leaves.

The moral of the story is that you not only have to attach a polarizer to a lens, you have to turn the polarizer to a position that achieves the look that you desire. Your polarizer might have a white dot displayed on the part that turns after the filter is attached to the lens. Though I have never used the white dot, it is there so you can keep track of the position of the polarizer.

Two tips:

Remember not to use a polarizer on a wide angle lens when photographing the sky. Remember to use it when not photographing the sky.

When looking through the viewfinder or at the camera's LCD, always turn the polarizer counterclockwise. If you turn it clockwise, you may accidentally unscrew the filter from your lens.

[Manfred M]

Christian - all polarizing filters used on cameras have a threaded element that screws into the lens mount and a front end that rotates. Careful on the direction of rotation; if you turn in the same direction as to remove it from the lens, you could unscrew it.

The reason the front element rotates is so that you can adjust the angle of the front polarizing element, to get the desired effect. Just grab the front part of the ring of the filter and turn it while looking through your viewfinder.

[Brownbear]

Thank you for expanding on the topic. Yes, I read that in a book and your explanation is far more informative. My new polarizer has the white dot, and my used polarizer (tamron) doesn't and will be tossed as soon as I can figure out how to get it off my lens.

So many landscape images have sky so great to know... How does one define wide angle when photographing the sky in terms of mm, ie; 10, 18, 55, less than 100?

Thank you.

It's great to see photos that turned out so much better due to your control rather than luck. Your recent photos show a consistently higher quality.

About polarizers:

It's fine to leave the polarizer on when the sun is to your back and any advice to the contrary can be very misleading. (That assumes that the reduced amount of light entering the lens is not problematic.) It's not just the angle of the sun to your camera that is important; it's also the angle of reflected surfaces relative to the sun and the camera that are also important. That's because the light's angle of entry onto a surface is equal to the angle of exit. (There are two terms other than "entry" and "exit" that are usually used but I can't think of what they are at the moment.)

Though the sky probably won't be affected by the polarizer when the sun is to your back and though other surfaces may not be affected as much as in other situations, it's possible that some glare on the surfaces of shiny materials such as leaves can be somewhat minimized even in that situation.

Hold the part of the polarizer that screws onto the lens in your fingers without touching the other part. Alternatively, attach the filter snugly onto a lens. Then turn the element itself separately from the part that screws into the lens. That's the control that Manfred mentioned.

The results of that control are most easily seen when you point the camera toward the blue part of the sky when the sun is low and 90 degrees to your right. Turn the polarizer in that situation and you'll see the color of the sky magically change in your viewfinder. Similarly, avoid the sky and instead point the camera to leaves of grass or leaves on trees. Slowly turn the polarizer and suddenly at one point most of the "colorless" glare disappears, revealing the color and texture in the leaves.

The moral of the story is that you not only have to attach a polarizer to a lens, you have to turn the polarizer to a position that achieves the look that you desire. Your polarizer might have a white dot displayed on the part that turns after the filter is attached to the lens. Though I have never used the white dot, it is there so you can keep track of the position of the polarizer.

Two tips:

Remember not to use a polarizer on a wide angle lens when photographing the sky. Remember to use it when not photographing the sky.

When looking through the viewfinder or at the camera's LCD, always turn the polarizer counterclockwise. If you turn it clockwise, you may accidentally unscrew the filter from your lens.

[Brownbear]

Thank you. I will try exactly that

Christian - all polarizing filters used on cameras have a threaded element that screws into the lens mount and a front end that rotates. Careful on the direction of rotation; if you turn in the same direction as to remove it from the lens, you could unscrew it.

The reason the front element rotates is so that you can adjust the angle of the front polarizing element, to get the desired effect. Just grab the front part of the ring of the filter and turn it while looking through your viewfinder.

[Mike Buckley]

How does one define wide angle when photographing the sky in terms of mm, ie; 10, 18, 55, less than 100?

The issue that can adversely affect photos on your camera, which has a 1.5 crop factor, could perhaps occur at any focal length below 35mm and certainly at anything at 24mm or below. It's important that you understand what you're trying to avoid, so take a photo of the sky using a filter and your widest angle lens. If you use maximum polarization when the sun is in the ideal position, you'll see that about half the sky in the photo is a completely different color than the other half. You have to experience it to fully appreciate it, so be sure to try to make that bad photo.

I think most people generally consider any focal length at 24mm or shorter as wide-angle focal lengths.