Mountain Scenes

[Brownbear]

Here are a few images of coastal mountain scenery from Vancouver's North Shore.

I constantly struggle with this type of scenery and I think part of the challenge for me is not being able to capture what I see, perhaps not being able to see the most effective composition, and/or having the light fall in the right places.

I think these are an improvement on my past mountain scenery attempts but still not there. As one of my goals for this year is to improve my skills in capturing this type of scenery I'd be most appreciative of feedback on which if any of these images work better than others, and why, and especially the why not's for the ones that don't work.

Images 1-3
Focal length 300 mm ISO 100 f/8 SS 1/60

Photographed at first frost (recommended by Manfred) and the one and the morning after our one and only snowfall... It did eliminate the usual haze seen on the mountains.

1.



2.



3.


Of this set, I think #1 works the best because of the lines and contrast but I personally prefer #2 & #3 for the pinkish light mist... Is it that the mist is just too abundant?

*Note The WB are different in #1, #2 & #3 are processed differently because the image as photographed is very blue (pre and during sunrise) with a hint of pink. #1 is warmer because it suited the image (in my mind).

f 6.7 ISO 100 SS 1/1000 Focal length 500 mm

4.



This last image is the image that represents a most beautiful scene in my mind but doesn't translate to the picture. Perhaps I'm too infatuated with mist?

Thank you.

[NorthernFocus]

Christina, we share the same nemesis. I can't seem to get a grasp on mountains. And I'm also infatuated with fog/mist among the peaks and evergreens. Every time I walk the dog in the park near our home I'm looking at a scene remarkably similar to your first image here. And I've yet to get a decent shot of it.

IMO the second image is the best of the lot. Nice lighting and good detail in the snow clad trees in the upper right. Those trees are obscured just a bit too much by the cloud in the third shot. I have the feeling no.4 has the most potential but have no idea how to pull it out of there. Perhaps it is just a bit too much cloud. But others more skilled at landscape may have some suggestions. To which I'll pay close attention. I have dozens of similar images in my files that I can't bring myself to delete

[Shadowman]

These may not be the scenes as you remember them, but they look pretty interesting to me. Nice series.

[tbob]

Here is my read on the problem, if any . You have a great eye. Just get rid of the stuff that is extraneous and accenutuate what is that attracted you. These are my reads on the images, bear in mind they are my interpretation of what I see.

The first, I suspect it was the outcrop of rock. crop down, increase the saturation, contrast and sharpen




Same on two



Three similar but this time the swirling mist was accentuated



On four I really went over the top on the mist, increase contrast and sharpen (probably a bit much but I wanted to emphasize the point).

[Stagecoach]

Hi Christina,

For me No 2 works the best because I see a good balance between sky, fog/cloud and area of the mountain side on the right showing good detail.

No 1 IMO includes too much of the green conifers that are almost featureless taking up 50% of the image. By featureless I mean repetitive pattern It may have worked better by framing so that the conifers spread from 1/2 way up the right side to 1/3 rd along the bottom from the left.

No 4, is similar to what I have attempted to do in the tree covered mountains here when surrounded in cloud, it looks great when you are there but just does not seem to hold that same magic when photographed. There must be a way to capture it

Google 'Mountain Scenes' and look at the images. There may be some ideas there that are applicable to the scenery you have available to you.

Grahame

[Brownbear]

Dan... Thank you for your input. Very helpful. I've seen a few misty mountain scenes from you that are beautiful! Nevertheless it is nice to know that you see the beauty that I see, and I'll capture it one day.

John... Thank you. These are an improvement from last year, I think. Thanks for always being there for me for my mountain challenges.

Trevor... Thanks a million! Very helpful to see and hear your feedback. I really like your edits of the 1st and the 2nd... The 3rd is my fault because I expanded the sky a bit on top and I can't do it well, yet. I can see the effects in your edit. For the last one it is too much contrast/black point for me but nevertheless very helpful to see. I was too shy with the contrast and sharpening so will post another one after this.

Grahame...
Thank you as always... Nice to hear that you prefer #2, too. I presumed everyone would prefer #1 because it is more contrasty, less mist and clouds so sharper... Repetitive pattern is supposed to be a good thing, or so I thought. Anyway I have about 8 more shots of that same version, including some with less trees and a lot more mountain so I will revisit those with a more analytical mind. Yes, it is was magical to see. I will google misty mountains and see what I can find.

Thank you to all!

[Brownbear]

In reply to Trevor's feedback and post processing pointers...

Here is an edit and also another version of the Misty Mountain scene that I'm always struggling with. I added more midtone contrast but I didn't extend the black point all the way. I sharpened more aggressively but still erased some of the sharpening from the clouds. I also increase the saturation of select colours and decreased the luminosity of other colours (yellow)

Original post processed more aggressively.



Thank you to all!

[selig1656]

Interesting series , Pic #1 the bottom seems to need some sharpening, too much green maybe detracting from the main subject. Both two and three are conceptually nice but too much of blue tint for me , needs some adjusting. Pic four over the top and the balance could use a little adjusting and maybe some more contrast . How did you meter this ?

[Mike Buckley]

The compositions and post-processing work very well for me in the first three. With apologies to Trevor, his post-processing is over-the-top unnatural for me on these images and gives me the impression that something is trying to be made of something that isn't there in the first place -- magical light.

That leads to my thinking as to why this type of photography is some of the most difficult kind for two reasons: 1) There is so much fantastic photography of this type that the bar is set so very high. 2) To make the really special photos in this genre, the pros generally spend weeks and sometimes longer camping in the field hoping to get just a few images that meet that bar.

Christina: I remember that you have Galen Rowell's Mountain Light. Using his photos as examples, he captured the photos in that book over many years (from 1970 to 1985) and the light in your photos in this thread doesn't compare to the light in his photos. The only way you can compete with that is to spend the same time in the field that he did and that others like him do. Keep in mind that that book represents on average only five photos per year (not that he didn't make other equally good photos but the photos in the book are presumably the best of the genre).

So, when you have an outing and come back with photos such as these, be pleased with them; they're very nice. Don't try to make more of them than what they are. Don't be disappointed because of what they aren't; understand that the light is enjoyable but not magical. When you're lucky enough to be at a scene when the light is magical -- and it's going to take one heck of a lot of luck when you aren't camping in the wilderness -- you'll come home with some truly exciting images.

For what it's worth, that's my take.

[Nicks Pics]

HI Christina,
Firstly, I think these are really beautiful mountain scenes, they must have been fabulous in person. It sounds like other people, and yourself have pointed out most things I had thought already. I see what is attractive about the composition in #1, but I think that it would have helped if the evergreens were not so shadowed, because they don't attract the eye very quickly being dim, though the pattern is interesting. I too liked #2, better than #3 because the cloud in #3 is too much in the middle of the view I think. I'm sure #4 was beautiful to see, and the image is interesting, but one can't quite see enough of what's behind the clouds as one would like, so the perspective of the original viewer may not be there so much for the viewer of the photo.

I think the stronger light that Trevor has illustrated helps, so long as the highlight/shadow areas are not adversely effected.

Overall, good efforts, I think you got some lovely images.

[IzzieK]

I am wondering how long that mist last? Maybe you should be on the lookout as to the time of day you shoot these kind of sceneries. Maybe much earlier in the day will be nice. I am sure many here like me feels the frustration of seeing something so beautiful but cannot interpret it as seen in person through photographs...nature can be fickle especially on circumstances surrounding the capturing of a beautiful place like this...anyway

in #1...I agree with Nick, the green is just too green and shadowy, maybe tame it down a little bit?
#2 and three is a real challenge here because the mist are just too thick, but I like the edit of Trevor. Your edit though it follows Trevor's interpretation is more on the subtle side. I like both interpretations.

[Brownbear]

Hi Raymond,

Thank you for your feedback. Helpful and appreciated.

With respect to the first image I can see that I included too many trees in this image. I took a few shots with less trees and more mountain so this great for me to know when I review the others. I will also sharpen the trees more.

I can see #2 and #3 will be too blue for many. I can make them warmer but then I lose the pink light on the trees (a few minutes prior to sunrise), creating a more golden image, and perhaps this will be the way to go.

I set the exposure for the 1st 3 images on the snowy trees, so as not to blow the highlights, which resulted in the darker foreground trees in the first image (shadows were lifted in post processing)

I set the exposure for the last image on the clouds (highlights again). Can you explain what you mean by more balance? This would be helpful for me to know for future misty scenes. With respect to more contrast, it was a low contrast scene and I did add more contrast and raise the black point but with too much of this I feel like lose the true feel of the mist and clouds.

If you like, I can send you the raw image to give processing it a try.

Thank you.

Interesting series , Pic #1 the bottom seems to need some sharpening, too much green maybe detracting from the main subject. Both two and three are conceptually nice but too much of blue tint for me , needs some adjusting. Pic four over the top and the balance could use a little adjusting and maybe some more contrast . How did you meter this ?

[Brownbear]

Thank you Mike. As always, very helpful.

I appreciate the time you have taken to explain Galen Rowell's imagery (and others). I'm slowly realizing that finding that kind of light must be very rare. I don't have the means or time, or the fortitude to camp in for weeks in the wilderness. I have yet to see magical light but perhaps I'll get lucky one day. So for now I'll be happy that I captured a pretty scene with nice light, and sharp tree tops, and especially no haze.

A misty mountain top, I should be able to capture because I live in a misty place!

Thank you Mike. You've made me feel better about my mountain scenes.

The compositions and post-processing work very well for me in the first three. With apologies to Trevor, his post-processing is over-the-top unnatural for me on these images and gives me the impression that something is trying to be made of something that isn't there in the first place -- magical light.

That leads to my thinking as to why this type of photography is some of the most difficult kind for two reasons: 1) There is so much fantastic photography of this type that the bar is set so very high. 2) To make the really special photos in this genre, the pros generally spend weeks and sometimes longer camping in the field hoping to get just a few images that meet that bar.

Christina: I remember that you have Galen Rowell's Mountain Light. Using his photos as examples, he captured the photos in that book over many years (from 1970 to 1985) and the light in your photos in this thread doesn't compare to the light in his photos. The only way you can compete with that is to spend the same time in the field that he did and that others like him do. Keep in mind that that book represents on average only five photos per year (not that he didn't make other equally good photos but the photos in the book are presumably the best of the genre).

So, when you have an outing and come back with photos such as these, be pleased with them; they're very nice. Don't try to make more of them than what they are. Don't be disappointed because of what they aren't; understand that the light is enjoyable but not magical. When you're lucky enough to be at a scene when the light is magical -- and it's going to take one heck of a lot of luck when you aren't camping in the wilderness -- you'll come home with some truly exciting images.

For what it's worth, that's my take.

[Brownbear]

Hi Nick,

Thank you. As always you seem to have a knack for providing good feedback. I did lift the shadows on those trees, and at a later date I will try lifting them more in another similar image with less trees.

Agreed about #2 being the best, with less clouds/mist, and the same for #4. I will keep an eye out for a scene like #4 but with less clouds and mist.

HI Christina,
Firstly, I think these are really beautiful mountain scenes, they must have been fabulous in person. It sounds like other people, and yourself have pointed out most things I had thought already. I see what is attractive about the composition in #1, but I think that it would have helped if the evergreens were not so shadowed, because they don't attract the eye very quickly being dim, though the pattern is interesting. I too liked #2, better than #3 because the cloud in #3 is too much in the middle of the view I think. I'm sure #4 was beautiful to see, and the image is interesting, but one can't quite see enough of what's behind the clouds as one would like, so the perspective of the original viewer may not be there so much for the viewer of the photo.

I think the stronger light that Trevor has illustrated helps, so long as the highlight/shadow areas are not adversely effected.

Overall, good efforts, I think you got some lovely images.

[Brownbear]

Hi Izzie,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Truly helpful to hear. The mist can last for days on end. These images were taken starting at half an hour before sunrise to half an hour after sunrise. The way the light rises over the mountain tops makes capturing the lighting challenging to find and capture.

It has been very helpful to hear everyone's input and advice on the dark green trees, and also when too much mist is just too much. Thank you Izzie!

I am wondering how long that mist last? Maybe you should be on the lookout as to the time of day you shoot these kind of sceneries. Maybe much earlier in the day will be nice. I am sure many here like me feels the frustration of seeing something so beautiful but cannot interpret it as seen in person through photographs...nature can be fickle especially on circumstances surrounding the capturing of a beautiful place like this...anyway

in #1...I agree with Nick, the green is just too green and shadowy, maybe tame it down a little bit?
#2 and three is a real challenge here because the mist are just too thick, but I like the edit of Trevor. Your edit though it follows Trevor's interpretation is more on the subtle side. I like both interpretations.

[Manfred M]

You're certainly getting there with your latest mountain shots. The lighting is quite interesting and the view is crisp; outside of the cloudy areas.

As others have mentioned, the next step is to watch your composition; eliminating things that don't add to the image and frame accordingly. I find that one can use the clouds (if they cooperate) to frame the image, and you've done that to some extent on the first three images, although I'm not sure I like the amount you have in these images. As with what others have posted, I like #2 the best and if it were my image, I would tighten the crop a bit to downplay the softness from the clouds on the lower left even more. Image 4, doesn't do it at all for me just nothing there, even when you try to pull things out.

Regardless, I think you are onto something and these are definitely your mountain shots to date. Good light and good clarity are a start; fine tune your composition the next time you get this kind of weather and your images will be even stronger than these!

[Brownbear]

Hi Manfred,

Thank you for taking the time to share your expertise, and to advise and encourage. Truly appreciated.

I believe the next time around I will be more prepared for the clouds and mist in terms of forming a stronger composition. The cold weather definitely helped eliminate the haze and the next time we experience any frost or snow I will try again. Not likely for this year but hopefully!

I can also see from a review of my mountain images that indeed I still need to simplify the compositions more. I still get wrapped up in the beauty of the overall scene.

I will delete all the misty mountain images (#4 series) and try again another day.

Here is a new edit of #2, cropped closer. I also warmed up the WB to see what others think but couldn't warm it up too much because all the highlights start to clip. I have also included another shot of #1 (different pic) with less trees, just for feedback.

#2 Edited



#1 (Different shot of the same scene cropped to 16 x 9 eliminating most of the sky)




Thank you.

You're certainly getting there with your latest mountain shots. The lighting is quite interesting and the view is crisp; outside of the cloudy areas.

As others have mentioned, the next step is to watch your composition; eliminating things that don't add to the image and frame accordingly. I find that one can use the clouds (if they cooperate) to frame the image, and you've done that to some extent on the first three images, although I'm not sure I like the amount you have in these images. As with what others have posted, I like #2 the best and if it were my image, I would tighten the crop a bit to downplay the softness from the clouds on the lower left even more. Image 4, doesn't do it at all for me just nothing there, even when you try to pull things out.

Regardless, I think you are onto something and these are definitely your mountain shots to date. Good light and good clarity are a start; fine tune your composition the next time you get this kind of weather and your images will be even stronger than these!

[ShaneS]

Christina these are lovely but I agree with what others have said. The composition on your 16x9 version on #1 is better IMHO but it looks a lot warmer to me and I prefer the cool tones in the first version.

Having said all that I am reminded of some reading I have been doing on project work that is along the lines of what Mike said in terms of the time frame to get a group of great images together. The photographer who wrote the article indicated that one good shot a month was his goal (he war working on a street portfolio). For a weekend warrior (which I am and I presume you are too) that might even be a stretch when it comes to landscapes - right place, wrong conditions etc.

Keep on getting out there...

[Kaye Leggett]

I will delete all the misty mountain images (#4 series) and try again another day.

Don't delete them - stick them in a folder and next time you shoot misty images use them as a comparison, it will encourage you as you get better. Then when you have better ones, delete the old ones and so on......... That way you see your progress.

PS I like your shots here.

[Donald]

Don't delete them - stick them in a folder and next time you shoot misty images use them as a comparison, it will encourage you as you get better. Then when you have better ones, delete the old ones and so on......... That way you see your progress.

I'm not going to comment on the images in the thread because I think there's been a huge amount of really helpful stuff said already. And it's very obvious that you, Christina, are absorbing it all. No, my comment is about what Kaye wrote above. And just to say that is good lesson as well. It's a very useful way of measuring/assessing progress.

I'm going to have a couple of opportunities later this year to exhibit some of my stuff. So, I have started to get very serious about which 10/12 images I'm going to print for that purpose. Once you start doing that you really start applying critical awareness and, quite quickly, start seeing the weaknesses in all those images that just 2 - 3 years ago, you thought were wonderful. So, it's good to look back at your own stuff with a critical eye and be able to acknowledge how you have improved.