Desert Colors, Desert Sunset Photography

[Kamala]

Exposure to get the colors of the sky. Not much sand features with this exposure. Comments/critique appreciated.

[dcstep]

We've got a gorgeous sky with distant mountains, I think. This is a time where I'd ditch the "foreground interest" and move past that plant that dominates the scene. I'm thinking that positioning myself on the other side of that plan and cropping with a 2:1 aspect ratio, with the horizon below half way down, would pull us into that wonderful sky.

[Kamala]

@dcstep thanks for the inputs and feedback... Agreed, I was very focussed on the desert and foreground. I did capture some good sky but I was so overwhelmed with desert beauty, I might have missed capturing it.

[Tony Parsons]

I like the way that the 'random' vegetation actually leads the eye into the picture, which to me emphasises the subtle beauty of the sky.

[mikemorrellNL]

Hi @Kamala,  I haven't been on PN for a while so I just saw your request.

For me, this photo stands out in your album Precious Planet because of its muted colors and contrast compared to your other (more saturated) color photos. There's absolutely nothing wrong with muted colors and contrast but my gut feeling is that this photo would benefit from a small 'boost'. From your other color phothers, my strong impression is that you're very competent at post-processing.

I hope you don't mind but I downloaded a copy just to  see what difference a small 'boost' might make. I will of course immediately delete the download!

Up to you, but my impression is that increasing the saturation and (linear) contrast by about 60%  - even just for the sky - brings the photo more 'to life' while still retaining the pastel color palette. So my tip is - if you  haven't already done so - just to experiment with increasing saturation and contrast.

I fully understand that you want to keep the photo 'natural' and the color palette subtle. So it's a fine balance between 'keeping everything natural' and providing enough visual interest.

I remember watching a YouTube video years ago in which 2 photographers basically said: about post-processing: "photography (+ post-processing) is not only about capturing 'realiity', it's about capturing the experience you felt when you were there". 

So in this case, if you felt  (whatever) by the desert sunset, you need to let viewers know through your photo whatever you felt. And why you felt it was worthwhile photgraphing. In other words, if  you loved the dramatic sky then emphasize the dramatic sky (saturation, contrast) so that viewers can share your experience on the day.

OK, you're an experienced photographer and - being long-winded 🙂 - I've said more than enough.!

Whatever you decide, I hope this comment helps. I have absolute faith that you'll make the right decisions for thos photo, whatever they may be.

Mike

PS. I've followed you because your photos are wonderful!

 

 

[dcstep]

6 hours ago, mikemorrellNL said:

Hi @Kamala,  I haven't been on PN for a while so I just saw your request.

For me, this photo stands out in your album Precious Planet because of its muted colors and contrast compared to your other (more saturated) color photos. There's absolutely nothing wrong with muted colors and contrast but my gut feeling is that this photo would benefit from a small 'boost'. From your other color phothers, my strong impression is that you're very competent at post-processing.

I hope you don't mind but I downloaded a copy just to  see what difference a small 'boost' might make. I will of course immediately delete the download!

Up to you, but my impression is that increasing the saturation and (linear) contrast by about 60%  - even just for the sky - brings the photo more 'to life' while still retaining the pastel color palette. So my tip is - if you  haven't already done so - just to experiment with increasing saturation and contrast.

I fully understand that you want to keep the photo 'natural' and the color palette subtle. So it's a fine balance between 'keeping everything natural' and providing enough visual interest.

I remember watching a YouTube video years ago in which 2 photographers basically said: about post-processing: "photography (+ post-processing) is not only about capturing 'realiity', it's about capturing the experience you felt when you were there". 

So in this case, if you felt  (whatever) by the desert sunset, you need to let viewers know through your photo whatever you felt. And why you felt it was worthwhile photgraphing. In other words, if  you loved the dramatic sky then emphasize the dramatic sky (saturation, contrast) so that viewers can share your experience on the day.

OK, you're an experienced photographer and - being long-winded 🙂 - I've said more than enough.!

Whatever you decide, I hope this comment helps. I have absolute faith that you'll make the right decisions for thos photo, whatever they may be.

Mike

PS. I've followed you because your photos are wonderful!

 

 

This has always been an interesting photography paradox to me. I began my post-processing journey doggedly clinging to "reality" and "accuracy". I was lucky enough to be invited by Getty Images to sell my images on the site and immediately noticed that purchasers of my landscapes would almost always "goose" the saturation. Not HDR-crazy, but just a bit.

Next, I was in John Fielder's Gallery in Denver, looking at printing options with my printer and friend, Tony Eitzel, when I started laughing at one huge print by a photographer other than Fielder. The saturation slider must have been almost all the way to the right. On top of that, I could see some lazy Cloning on one side of the shot of a field of aspen trees in fall. Tony said something like, "Don't laugh, that's the best selling print in the gallery!"

I now "juice" everything a little bit and sell in a gallery in addition to Getty. Potential buyers NEVER worry with it. Mine is still very restrained, such that photographers don't mention it, but I think it does help with appeal. If I weren't selling, but just hanging on my wall, I'd still do it, since it's more pleasing to my family and friends.

I'm with Mike on this one, thinking that gently increasing Saturation and Contrast would be more appealing to most viewers.

[mikemorrellNL]

15 hours ago, dcstep said:

This has always been an interesting photography paradox to me. I began my post-processing journey doggedly clinging to "reality" and "accuracy". I was lucky enough to be invited by Getty Images to sell my images on the site and immediately noticed that purchasers of my landscapes would almost always "goose" the saturation. Not HDR-crazy, but just a bit.

Next, I was in John Fielder's Gallery in Denver, looking at printing options with my printer and friend, Tony Eitzel, when I started laughing at one huge print by a photographer other than Fielder. The saturation slider must have been almost all the way to the right. On top of that, I could see some lazy Cloning on one side of the shot of a field of aspen trees in fall. Tony said something like, "Don't laugh, that's the best selling print in the gallery!"

I now "juice" everything a little bit and sell in a gallery in addition to Getty. Potential buyers NEVER worry with it. Mine is still very restrained, such that photographers don't mention it, but I think it does help with appeal. If I weren't selling, but just hanging on my wall, I'd still do it, since it's more pleasing to my family and friends.

I'm with Mike on this one, thinking that gently increasing Saturation and Contrast would be more appealing to most viewers.

Haha, I love the story about the John Fielder's Gallery in Denver! I'm definitely not a fan of - to my eye - oversaturated photos. Or photos that just look 'overly post-processed'. Yet 'highly saturated' and/or contrast-rich landscapes, wildlife photos, etc. score highly on websites such as 500px. And are also displayed using a google search term like 'best landscape photos'. I should add that very subtle 'mood'  (early morning) photos with very little color or contrast also appear on 'best landscape photos' too. But they're in the minority. These days, people who shoot JPEG photos (where JPEG images are processed in-camera) can dial in their preferred 'picture style' such as 'Vivid', 'Portrait', 'Neutral', etc. They can also edit their picture styles. 

I prefer to shoot 'RAW' images which are not processed in-camera but on my laptop. So by default, RAW images are 'neutral'. Like you, where I feel a photo could benefit from post-processing, it's restrained. I always try to post-process RAW 'neutral' photos so that they remain 'believable'. In the sense that viewers don't immediately think 'this has a lot of post-processing'.

I'm just an amateur (voluntary) photographer. who doesn't want or need to sell any photos. TBH playing music is my main hobby and taking photos is something I do if someone asks me.
 

@Kamala My excuses for hijacking your thread with my response to @dcstep. But based on my comment above that "I should add that very subtle 'mood'  (early morning) photos with very little color or contrast also appear on 'best landscape photos' too" I suddenly that reducing saturation and contrast might also be an option to create an 'end of day' mood photo.  My main suggestion remains the same: whatever you felt at the time *wonder at the colors of the sky' or a 'quite stillness as the sun disappears from the desert vista", try to express your feelings at that time more vividly in your photo. Either (as suggested by  @dcstep and me) by bumping up the saturation and contrast, or - conversely - reducing the color and contrast to create more of an 'end of day in the desert' mood picture.

Edited February 29 by mikemorrellNL

[hjoseph7]

The snow looks a little greyish. A stop or two over-exposure might have improved this picture... 

[Kamala]

@dcstep @mikemorrellNL @hjoseph7 Thank you for all the comments, inputs and discussion.  I am attaching the image I worked on again, with a slightly more saturated skies and slightly overexposed foreground... I like this better ! One aspect I am missing in this picture are the sand textures and details, which is what I was trying to bring out. but unsuccessful. Most of my shots on this trip could not capture those details. 

The skies that day was amazing. I was scouting the landscape that evening and I got this one amazing shot I could share. I expected to get similar skies at least for a day to lock in my location, but skies did not cooperate.

I post process my pictures a lot and play with colors, tones and saturation quite a bit. I want to bring out my experience I had. My initial thinking was not to go with too much post processing. But I did learn that many professionals do post process to bring out the mood. So, I decided to post process my images, at times a lot! 

I used to oversaturate my pictures, and I did get inputs on those images by previous version of photo net members. 

I will play with these images again. I usually revisit images once in a few months and give it another look. At times a fresh look provides more/better ideas!

[dcstep]

14 hours ago, Kamala said:

@dcstep @mikemorrellNL @hjoseph7 Thank you for all the comments, inputs and discussion.  I am attaching the image I worked on again, with a slightly more saturated skies and slightly overexposed foreground... I like this better ! One aspect I am missing in this picture are the sand textures and details, which is what I was trying to bring out. but unsuccessful. Most of my shots on this trip could not capture those details. 

The skies that day was amazing. I was scouting the landscape that evening and I got this one amazing shot I could share. I expected to get similar skies at least for a day to lock in my location, but skies did not cooperate.

I post process my pictures a lot and play with colors, tones and saturation quite a bit. I want to bring out my experience I had. My initial thinking was not to go with too much post processing. But I did learn that many professionals do post process to bring out the mood. So, I decided to post process my images, at times a lot! 

I used to oversaturate my pictures, and I did get inputs on those images by previous version of photo net members. 

I will play with these images again. I usually revisit images once in a few months and give it another look. At times a fresh look provides more/better ideas!

I think that this is a nice improvement.  The sky is the star of the show and you've made that clear, without going overboard. I've found that evening and snow photography can generally stand more saturation, as you've done here.

[mikemorrellNL]

1 hour ago, dcstep said:

I think that this is a nice improvement.  The sky is the star of the show and you've made that clear, without going overboard. I've found that evening and snow photography can generally stand more saturation, as you've done here.

+1 for me.