Sedona Arizona and a question

[RBSinTo]

Last October, my wife and I flew to Phoenix Arizona to attend the wedding of a life-long (we met in first grade in 1953) friend's son, but first spent a few days in Sedona.
The day before we arrived there were severe rainstorms with serious flash-flooding and for our first two days there, the skies were cloudy and the temperature relatively cold.
One morning while on our way to the Grand canyon, when our tour stopped to pick up passengers, I had a few minutes to grab a photo of a nearby landscape scene shrouded in early morning fog and cloudy skies. As taken the scene has homes and various bits of civilization in the foreground which I feel detracts and so I produced a version with all traces of civilization removed, which I prefer. As I literally never do photography of this type, I wondered what the feeling is among those who do, of manipulation of this sort. I would never enter this in any nature-type competition as I understand the rules about manipulation are quite strict, but I wondered if this sort of thing is frowned upon. Your thoughts and comments would be appreciated.
For the sake of clarity, I am posting both shots.
Nikon D3
Sigma 12-24 f4.5-5.6 autofocus zoom
exposure probably f8 @ 1/60th

[Manfred M]

This is one of those shots where time spent burning and dodging will bring out the image more.



Generally in CAPA rules Nature competition, the only "rule" is that the "hand of man" cannot be seen, so rebuilding the foreground does that effectively. There is a minimal manipulation category, but that is generally not restricted to nature.

[RBSinTo]

This is one of those shots where time spent burning and dodging will bring out the image more.



Generally in CAPA rules Nature competition, the only "rule" is that the "hand of man" cannot be seen, so rebuilding the foreground does that effectively. There is a minimal manipulation category, but that is generally not restricted to nature.

Manfred,
As I don't shoot nature for entry into competition, I really pay no attention to its rules, so I appreciate your insight.
Thanks,
Robert

[Tri Danimal]

I think the image looks MUCH better with the foreground "modified". Personally, I would not try to pass off the second image as the image that was captured like that. I think others would accept it as long as they knew it was a blended image.

Keep up the good work. remember only you need to like your final resultant image.

[RBSinTo]

I think the image looks MUCH better with the foreground "modified". Personally, I would not try to pass off the second image as the image that was captured like that. I think others would accept it as long as they knew it was a blended image.

Keep up the good work. remember only you need to like your final resultant image.

Daniel,
Thanks for commenting.
Please understand that there has not been nor will there be any attempt to 'pass off' the manipulated image as reality. I just liked the scene better without the homes in the foreground and did the work as an academic exercise for my own benefit. At best, if I ever become ambitious enough to print the shot, it would only end up on our wall. Nowhere else.
Roberet

[Manfred M]

I know I have posted these images before:


Ansel Adams work - This is a contact print of his famous piece; Moonrise - Hernadez New Mexico. Not exactly awe inspiring...




Go crazy with dodging and burning by Adams and you get this.



There is absolutely nothing wrong with reworking an image really hard.

[Tri Danimal]

Daniel,
Thanks for commenting.
Please understand that there has not been nor will there be any attempt to 'pass off' the manipulated image as reality. I just liked the scene better without the homes in the foreground and did the work as an academic exercise for my own benefit. At best, if I ever become ambitious enough to print the shot, it would only end up on our wall. Nowhere else.
Roberet

I totally get it. Im in a landscape astro group and many people add in a full moon to images that are clearly not captured on a full moon night, its easy to tell. Some of them try to pass it off on the monthly competitions (which is a BRO comp) and it is annoying.

As long as you are honest with your work then all is good in my opinion.

[rpcrowe]

I know I have posted these images before:


Ansel Adams work - This is a contact print of his famous piece; Moonrise - Hernadez New Mexico. Not exactly awe inspiring...




Go crazy with dodging and burning by Adams and you get this.



There is absolutely nothing wrong with reworking an image really hard.

I respect the great Ansel Adams... However if this specific image were posted on CiC in its reworked or original form, without members knowing it was an Ansel Adams product, I don't really think it would go very far in a mini competition, much less in a monthly competition...

Of course, that's just my "not at all humble" opinion