Outside my comfort zone on PP

[BrianA61]

Still going back through some of my older photos to see what kind of 'creative editing' I can come up with. This is from May, 2016 when we took a road trip to the Oregon coast. I saw these dead trees and rock wall from the road and immediately saw a potentially good photo op. After taking several different angles, this seemed to be the best one. Color version wasn't quite working for me so I tried B&W. Then, I went where I usually don't go. I did some (to my taste) extreme processing but I kind of like the result in an artsy-fartsy kind of way.

[Donald]

Keep going. You might get a taste for the artsy-fartsy look.

[NorthernFocus]

It's good to step out there once in a while. I like it.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Brian,

Not bad at all

For me, the biggest issue is the left hand stump 'touching' the top of frame - I'd (personally) rather see a just a bit of sky above it.

If this wasn't a PP crop choice - and you agree, or at least want to try - there is always the option of being 'more extreme' with the PP - and extending the canvas up a bit and filling the blank area with cloned or content aware fill. Just a thought.

I do like the composition and all the tilting elements (I have no idea where 'up' is, but that doesn't matter)

HTH, Dave

[BrianA61]

Thanks for the input, Dave. This isn't a cropped image and it is my bad that I didn't get the entire length of the left hand tree. I should've been more aware while composing the shot. I noticed that myself in my own harsh, self critiquing, but only after I got back home. Too far to go back for a "redo".

[Manfred M]

+1 to Dave's comment on the dead tree crossing the edge of the frame. One of the most important lessons I learned when doing landscape photography is to run my eye around the edges of the viewfinder looking for things that intrude over the edge (or in some cases get too close to the edge). Readjusting during capture is a lot simpler than fixing the problem in post.

In terms of the processing of this image; the scene has a raw and gritty look to it, so the PP work you did here complements the appearance of the landscape.

I have always considered myself to be a someone who has a creative bent. Anyone who spent most of his career designing things; industrial equipment, software, business processes, etc. has to be creative, but I would never consider myself to be an artist. Using PP to enhance the character of the image you have captured is not being "artsy-fartsy", it's just adding your personal touch to the image you have captured.

[BrianA61]

+1 to Dave's comment on the dead tree crossing the edge of the frame. One of the most important lessons I learned when doing landscape photography is to run my eye around the edges of the viewfinder looking for things that intrude over the edge (or in some cases get too close to the edge). Readjusting during capture is a lot simpler than fixing the problem in post.

In terms of the processing of this image; the scene has a raw and gritty look to it, so the PP work you did here complements the appearance of the landscape.

I have always considered myself to be a someone who has a creative bent. Anyone who spent most of his career designing things; industrial equipment, software, business processes, etc. has to be creative, but I would never consider myself to be an artist. Using PP to enhance the character of the image you have captured is not being "artsy-fartsy", it's just adding your personal touch to the image you have captured.

Thanks for the feedback Manfred. Artsy-fartsy is just a term I use to describe the way I have overprocessed (to me) the image. I don't normally go above and beyond on the processing side of photos as I like to adjust it to as natural as I remember seeing the scene through my viewfinder. I see a lot of photos that are overprocessed (IMO) and, that's OK. However, that is not my style as I opt for the more natural, simplistic and realistic view. There are just some photos, where the subject matter is good but there is just something that just doesn't quite look right. That's when I think they require some "brute force" methods like this. Compared to what I normally do, this is brute force adjusting. I still kind of like it myself, though.

[conkerwood]

Hi Brian
I echo the comment about the tree out the top. But rather than clone in a whole section of sky across the whole canvas, which is sometimes difficult to blend in perfectly, I think you would be better off shortening the offending tree slightly and cloning a small section above. It is relatively easy to do as you have plenty of material to work with and it gives a much better result. As for the look it certainly has impact. But there can be issues in going for 'extreme' processing, particularly if, as I suspect, you have made a number of global rather than local adjustments. In this case this has resulted in several areas in the shadows of the rocks where the blacks have been totally crushed, there is no detail there at all. If you go back to your original pic I bet there was detail in those shadows which has been lost by PP unless of course the pic was underexposed in the first place. If it is the case that there was detail there then I would suggest the pic is definitely worth reworking to fix the tree and ensure that the detail is not lost in PP. Do I like it? Yes I do, it is quite striking. Could it be better with a rework? In my opinion, definitely yes.

conkerwood.

[Wavelength]

Well done image