DSLRUsers.com

I have a book of forty photographs of Ansel Adams work which also details the thought process behind how he took each of the forty photographs. The effect this has on me is that nearly every time I shoot a landscape, I like to wonder how Ansel Adams would shoot the image, if he were still alive today. So I assess the scene before me, I visualise the image in B&W and then I go and totally wreck the concept.

The following image is of Tasman Glacier Lake, complete with icebergs. I think the weather was perfect for the effect I wanted, the day I photographed it. One day I will take a photo that emulates the great man, but until then, here is my best offering with level horizon, best viewed in HD. (So click on it)

I hope you like it. Critique always welcome.
Nikon D700 and Sigma 12-24mm.

This is an amazing image Steve. Great levels of detail and sharpness. I would however prefer a bit more contrast and maybe a sliver taken off the bottom.

Steve, I would love to hear your commentry and thought process before taking this!

I would also consider how his greatness would have POST produced it as well. It was an integral part of his workflow.

I quite like it but it could be more contrasty on my monitor. How did you convert to BW?

I like this shot. There's great detail and an interesting composition. I do not get a feeling of coldness and desolation, though. The muted tonal range makes it seem calm and peaceful to me.

Well done.

Cheers
Steffen.

This shot left me feeling very cold. I love it because to evoke this kind of reaction means it is bloody great

aim54x wrote: I would however prefer a bit more contrast and maybe a sliver taken off the bottom.

I agree with both points. I think if the contrast was upped a bit, it would be a fantastic image.
I too love Adams' work and have tried on occasion to emulate him, with of course very little success.

Frank

If you wanted to evoke cold and desolate, I think it does it quite well. [maybe you should keep the contrast the same!]

So I assess the scene before me, I visualise the image in B&W and then I go and totally wreck the concept.

I agree with the increased contrast, however a bit more brightness might also bring out some of the detail in the FG, failing that, chop it off and go with a pano style. Adjusting the levels and curves before converting to BW might also help bring out some detail in darker areas. nice stuff!

The area I photographed was/is very de-saturated in it's natural state. There is very little colour other than pale browns and greys. In colour it almost looks black and white. So when I first assessed the scene in my mind, even before I took my camera out, I suspected any image I took of it would look better in B&W. This was one of many images I took in this spot and I think all of them would have worked, except the OOF image that I deleted.

The post-processing I did for this were basically as follows;
Curve adjustment to get a bit more foreground detail on the left.
Cropping and straightening horizon.
Dodging the icebergs and other light areas to create more contrast.
Burning the sky and other dark areas that needed to stay dark.
Cloning some clouds to obscure a saturated area of the sky that I didn't like.
Cropping a bit more
Splitting RGB channels.
Deciding the BLUE channel had the most detail left in B&W
Some final contrast and curve adjustments to maintain detail.
Some more dodging and burning to try create a balance.
Resizing and some sharpening. I think about .3px at 80% so not much.
I might have missed a step or two.

The reason I did not use too much contrast, as I normally would do with B&W, is that I wanted to keep as much detail as possible across the entire image. From looking at Adams's work, it's something he seemed to do. Although he used large format cameras so had amazing detail as well, which I don't have the luxury of being able to emulate unless I take out a third mortgage.

I have noticed that with the FX camera that the SIGMA lens is lacking contrast towards the edges of shots. This was not as noticeable on film when this lens was coupled with my F5, but it does seem to be more pronounced on the D700. The Sigma seems to have an issue resolving contrast/detail on the extreme left of some images. I am not sure if this is because of the lens or my technique. Either way, it causes me grief. I would like to buy a new lens but until a +12mm FX lens is produced I will have to wait. I am considering the 14-24mm but I do really like the extra width the 12mm gives me.

Thing is, with this image, there are so many different variations to how I could have processed it. This is just one of a great many. One thing I can guarantee is that I will re-explore this image and it's siblings at some stage.

this is a standout image to your other NZ pixs...... as you say there are many ways to process this sceen, for me, I would just add a touch of brightness....... but also good as is

Steve,

After I read your post processing workflow, I thought it was wierd how this image is still looking flat. So I downloaded it to PS and WAhlah!! It looks awesome with much more detail and contrast. PS complained about an ICC profile at the beginning.

I think the forum may have resized this image losing sharpness in the process.

Could you check your original JPG and see whether it's saved in SRGB. If it's adobe RGB it would look funny on browsers and what not....

I hope you don't mind me editing your picture. [Let me know if you prefer I took it down; it's a private image on flickr]

I wonder whether you think this is too bright?



Click on photo to see sharper version!

Steve - what a cracker of an image - evocative, surreal, otherworldly. And icy cold brrrrr

Surenj - while I think ytou've done some interesting work on the image I think you've pushed it too far. The original is, to me, a far more interesting image because it is so low in contrast.

surenj wrote:I hope you don't mind me editing your picture. [Let me know if you prefer I took it down; it's a private image on flickr]

I wonder whether you think this is too bright?

I don't mind people having a go at PPing my images. It's always interesting to see how other photographers would approach the same scene and it's quite humbling to see people that are interested in an image I have taken. You have managed to get a more vibrant image out of the original although I feel it is a bit too much for my liking.

The main reason I have PPed the image so much is because I was trying to maintain a balance between shadows and highlights without looking too flat. It's not easy to do that and my skill is some way off perfection.

However, If you click on my image and see it at 1500px, it looks better and less flat that the smaller version shown here in the forum. Although I hasten to add that my new monitor is not calibrated so what I see and what everyone else sees is likely to be different.

Steve
He's Dead!

I like your image...in fact it's a beautiful capture! However, I think your processing and PP has not been entirely sympathetic to this landscape. I also don't think Suren got it right either...He has taken it too far. I think this is an image for a Master Photoshop user to process as it needs extensive work on the left hand side and a deft hand on the foreground. Perhaps you could offer it to the forum members to process as a kind of competition? I think the variety of results would be fascinating. Adams was a master printer and an alchemist in the darkroom. But he often spent weeks on one image.....Time and talent were his secrets. You used the light like Ansel but the negative is only the score....the final print is the performance!

(PS...Do I sound like I really know what I'm talking about?)

steve its a beautiful image and one which imo could only be truly appreciated viewed very large in real life. i love it.
i do agree its a bit flat though, just a minor tweak is all it needs imo.

very nice capture.

can I be sacrilegious (and in deference to the great AA) and ask perhaps to see this in color?

I can never get a B&W image to work well - I would love to see that starting image to see how the transition progresses if that is possible.

Steve

This is a great image. Congratulations.

I think Matt got it best,

this image is really perfect for a tutorial on how to process an image.

Matt's suggestion as the basis for a competition, or just a tutorial, with the aim of producing an image that Adams might have created could see us all learn a lot.

I have the Lauris Morgan-Griffiths book "Ansel Adams: Landscapes of the American West" and it includes stunning images.

Philip

OK. I'll offer the image to the forum to see how they would attack the image.

The wonderful thing is that we will not get two identical images, which will be terrific.

I'll start a new thread when I work out how to post a NEF for you to download.

Matt. K wrote:But he often spent weeks on one image

Didn't he say that one good image per month was an average pace for him?

If you want to have a go at post processing the image, the go to the following thread.

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=37636