scottish landscapes - 04 "Land of Wonders"

The uneven light could be the shadow of the clouds.

While I think this is a very pretty shot, the lion's share of my congratulations must go to mother nature for providing such a beautiful world. In here there is nice golden side-light but that's a minor accomplishment. You just wait for late in the day like the books tell you. The scene is pretty; the clouds are pretty; the foreground rocks and the distant castle are pretty. So I congratulate the photog for hiking to this scene and noticing it's beauty. But to me none of this is a significant photographic accomplishment. I think an truly original and creative landscape must be one of the harder photographs to make. And it is much more than a snap of a pretty scene. I realize I am a minority. That's okay with me.

I like Tom's crop because it places greater attention on the castle ruins. It also does a better job of using the lighter rock in the foreground right to lead across to the left. It's a solid crop, except for the fact that part of the castle is now cut off. I suppose cutting off the darker part of the castle isn't such a huge loss, but it is a loss.

Beautiful capture of colors and contrasts, so rich in Scotland. I've been there, so this picture is a nice memento. Congrats!

This is one of the strongest land- or seascape photos I have seen. Not a dead area anywhere in it.

A great photo of a great landscape. Perfect composition and excellent colours. A real pleasure to look at.

Many comment about there being a perfect capture here or words to that effect. It is an excellent picture but it is obvious that the tonal range presented was not captured. It was enhanced later. Perhaps one might say the the essence of the scene was 'captured' in the final image. It is an unlikely intent. We often see images where something is added to an image. Usually its a flying bird placed ever so perfectly along a rule of thirds crosspoint. Then comes the comments about the great capture even though it ought to be obvious that the image was not captured but, in fact, manufactured.

 

Some slack may be given to the tonal enhancements. Afterall, enhancements have been made in the darkroom from the beginning. We have been accustomed to seeing pictures that do not have the range of the human eye. When we see an image that does, it looks fake even though it is probably closer to what the human eye of the photograher saw. An irony indeed.

 

This image does not seem to be what the human eye would see however. Its enhancement went even beyond making up for the loss of range seen by film or a sensor. It is a very pleasing image though. But it is not a perfect "capture", at least not for its range. Maybe for its composition.

 

At least there is no fake bird flying across the scene

I agree with you Kent, it really is a pretty scene, and it's been well photographed (perhaps with some room for improvement in the post processing), but I'm not altogether sure there's a great deal that makes it worthy of discussion. Of course we can't have controversial imagery every week.

It is a too much manipulated image for my taste and looks more like a bad painting than a photo, the composition wasn�t nothing otherwordly. 4/4 Sorry.

Wonderful and I wouldn't touch a thing. Piotr's presented crop has the effect of making me feel like I am sitting on the copse of rocks looking out to the castle. I really like the decision to swing in to the right and then out to sea, which is right and fitting for a seascape. This image goes beyond the objective postcard and incorporates artistic decisions that light the emotions. Impossible to view and not feel something.

This image of a medieval castle in all its past glory and might is very good from the documentary point of view. It shows the castle in the advantageous position it held to dominate the portion of landscape they wanted to protect.

Composition is faultless. I don't mind at all the prominent rock in the foreground since it simply balaces well the strength of the castle in the background. I do object, strongly, to the adventurous cropper that just cut the castle in half: a notorious sign of lack of sensibility, blinded, perhaps by the talibanism of having to follow the "rules" while forgetting - at the same time - to see the whole picture.

Light and colours are beautiful with just that tad of additional force to simulate a closed shutter.I wonder where lies such objectable manipulation as my fellow countrymen, above, sees but I don't.

Since photographing castles in their territorial setting is a personal project of mine -well under way- I have to state my admiration for this very good image.

This is a simply stunning scene Pitor, mother nature certainly turned on some great light and you were in the right place to capture it.

 

I think that the composition leads to confusion as to the focal point of the image. The large rock in the foreground is bright and well detailed but it is competing with the castle in the background as the focal point - the eye wanders between the two. I think that if I had been in the same position I would be standing on that foreground rock, your mid-ground would make a better foreground. The use of a grad ND was probably not required here - the sky and castle look 'dirty' and too dark compared to the foreground, possibly adding to the rock/castle conflict. Perhaps a polariser would be a better choice?

 

I like the very subtle curve on the shoreline and the way the landscape dominates the sea - perhaps you would lose some of this effect with my suggestions? Thanks for sharing.

I would love to have this picture gracing my walls. I cannot think of any way to crop it which would improve it in my mind, and I believe that any artistic burning and dodging and color enhansement only improves the already striking scene. (The possible exception I see is that the color of the large rock on the right might be a bit too orange, but that is with my monitor and eyes -- possibly not so with others.)

 

Like a painting, book or other artistic endeavor, the artist himself is the one who decides what is best and how much and how far to go in finishing the piece. I absolutely love what photoshop can do, and although I, myself cannot achieve what this artist did here, I can admire it.

 

I am in full agreement with Alberto Conde who has experience photographing such scenes. I would strongly recommend that you all visit his portfolio for similar views and lighting with wonderful wide scopes. Such work is not easy to achieve. It takes great dedication and I admire both Alberto and Piotr's success. Bravo!

 

Willie the Cropper

Sweet light...I would however love to have seen the castle a bit closer..just a personal choice..overall I like the way the rocks curve and the clouds curve and the light...nice capture!

Hard to believe you used two stops of hard grad here. Incredible image though.

A very good composition, with an excellent, wonderfully detailed foreeground - the twisted lines of the rock expressing for me both the grim history of the place and also its collapse into ruin. However I find the castle, grass and sky look too heavily post-processed for my taste and I itch to get my hands on the original capture to see if it could be improved with a more natural-looking rendering.

Congratulations, this is one of the best photo that I have seen on this site.

A great photo of a great landscape. Perfect composition and excellent colours. A real pleasure to look at.

Thank you very much for all your comments / critiques. I was away for a couple of days (another photo trip) so I had no chance to answer your questions. A lot of discussion has been done here, and I am very happy to read all your opinions.

 

When it comes to cropping this image I was a bit confused about it. Personally I like Tom�s version � where the Castle is moved slightly to the right, but on the other hand I would miss that magic light on the right side - so I left the original version.

 

Another thing is the sky. I forgot to mention in my technical info that a polariser has also been used with this photo � and I think it must have been a reason for an uneven brightness of the whole sky. I know it is a �risky business� to use polarisers with such a wide focal length (16mm) but I was really tempted to get that warm colours on the foreground rocks � so excuse me for that.

 

Finally � Dave�s question about the post-processing done here. Well � most of my work is usually done in a RAW-developing programme (in this case it was Raw Shooter � which gives me a lot of flexibility with the all important options I need). Exposure, WB, Shadows/Highlights contrast etc was done within RS. Later on (with Photoshop) I did some regular levels correction and curve adjustment. Because of the used ND-Grad filter, some part of the castle was darker, I did some local retouching around this place - that is why I haven�t said it is purely un-manipulated photo. Some of you may say it�s cheating, but for me it�s not 100% true. There is no such filter on the market that would always fit to every scene � and digital darkroom can come in help to such situations. Thank you very much for all your nice words � and for your critique as well. Best regards � Piotr.

In comparing Piotr's shot with the cropped version given later in discussion the brilliance of Piotr's shot comes to the fore. The cropped version is the more 'commercial' interpretation, if you will - the sort of thing one would see in a brochure describing the wonders of 'quaint Scotland'. Piotr's shot is anchored by the rock foreground - it lends a solid and timesless feeling to the place that the commercial crop lacks. Lovely work, Piotr.

 

Lou

Thanks for the feedback Piotr. I always appreciate hearing from the photographer in POW discussions. Congrats on it by the way. Dave

A very pretty image. I find the large foreground object however to be little more than a mis-shapen blop that adds little IMO and distracts the eye. I think a better foreground element, and perhaps placed in a way that better balances against the background would have improved it immensely. Otherwise, it's another well-executed, pretty shot but nothing extraordinary.

A "large" view is recommended.

 

From a compositional standpoint, I have no problem with the relative dominance of the FG rock, but if it were my shot, I would have done something about the white bird poop and black blotch next to it. I would also have tried to frame the dark rock on the left to give it either more breathing room or get it out of the frame.

 

The crop that puts the blue puddle further into the lower right corner is ill advised, but the distraction could have been reduced with a different grad filter which would have made both it and the FG rock less prominent. (Yes, this does give you more shadow detail, so maybe the solution is to tone down the mid tones in post processing.)

 

I would be interested in knowing what sort of metering measurements determined the choice of a two stop.

A wonderful scenery, great lead-in to the sky and castle, excellent composition, the castle in classic thirds position (maybe that a slight panning to the right would have exluded the dark rock touching the border, with a nice crossing of the large foreground rock in the LL corner).

Kind of irony that some comment on too heavy postprocessing here... It was largely in-camera work, thanks Piotr for your tech info.

This ultra-wide lens with polarizer and 2 stops grad ND (I guess, handheld ?) is extremely tricky. The brightness gradient in the sky is a corollary of the polarizer, and the foreground is much brighter than the distant parts because of the grad ND.

For my taste, the grad ND effect is a bit over the top, unnatural feeling. It is often better to make three RAW shots, for exposure bracketing, and adjust dynamic range later with PS and composite / masking.

Very pretty scene, the wide angle rock looks a little odd to me though. Perhaps you could have got a different foreground effect by using camera or lens movements.

 

Cheers.