Sunset Glow

Phillip Island, Victoria

 

This photo was taken just before sunrise. The glow on the rock stacks never quite

reached their peak but I was still more than satisfied with the result. For scale, those

larger rocks at the bottom edge are the size of a person.

Looks gorgeous!!! I love pleasant colors of the rocks and water. Very nice exposure which gave you all details you need. Stunning. Regards

excellent detail great shot

I feel your title and the bright image don't quite match up. I did some tweaking by darkening and adding some pinkishness to the distant clouds and think it meets the test of a "sunset glow" somewhat better. These are easy adjustments which you can do on your own with an editing program such as PS. Often a fresh-out-the-camera shot doesn't give you what you actually saw, so it isn't always your best friend. It cuts down the drama you probably witnessed and gives a more illuminated "daylight" image. See the attachment. Hope this helps.

The sunset glow refers to the light on the rock stacks rather than any colours in the sky. I don't actually have that many blue sky pics in my portfolio but the contrast of orange against blue sky was one that I preferred to some of the later photos in this session. My philosophy with landscapes is to approximate what my eyes saw and the post is accurate in that regard. I don't like to push colours to far or add hues that do not exist which results in the very natural clean look that is often used to describe my work. By adding the pink to the sky an unnatural magenta cast has also been introduced to the rocks in the foreground that is incongruous with the sky colours. Photoshop is an essential tool as you say, particularly if you only shoot RAW like I do, but in my (perhaps biased) opinion, pushing the boundaries of what existed in the field conflicts with my integrity as a landscape photographer who strives to convey the reality of natural light. Personally, I think the most effective use of photoshop in landscape is where the viewer is not aware of its presence. I am not oppose to others using stronger digital enhancements, but it is not my style.

I appreciate your personal philosophy of keeping your landscapes as clean and natural as possible. You have embraced a style which emphasizes the natural and which marks your work. Nobody can fault you for pursuing that approach to photography. But, I think you are a vanishing breed. There are many of those like myself who explore and dream beyond what is to what something could be. It is merely another viewpoint and one which should be expressed, equally appreciated, and accepted as art even if not purely photographically derived. If you took my modification and placed it alongside your original for people to choose from, I suspect that the split would be about 50-50. But, thank you for sharing the natural beauty of this scenic and for tolerating my tinkering with it in open forum. If it displeases you,greatly, feel free to delete it from the critique with my blessing. Best wishes for more of your landscapes of natural beauty. Lamar McInnis, Sr.

I think you bring up an interesting point and discussion and I see nothing wrong with that. However I don't believe that landscape photographers with my philosophy are a vanishing breed. Perhaps on photo.net but in the big world of landscapes this is not true at all. My prediction is that photographers who 'create' their light and landscapes will never be regarded as great. The top landscape photographers in the world today : Art Wolfe, David Muench, John Shaw, Joe Cornish, Charlie Waite, David Ward, etc, etc would never be caught dead relying on post-capture techniques rather than natural conditions. And Marc Adamus, on photo.net will one day soon join this group. If you visit a true nature photography forum such as nature photographers network, a veritable who's who of the genre you'll see that this sort of ethic is alive and well. And to emphasize this philosophy, I'm not offended by the re-work at all. Only thing is I have no need for it. Because all I had to do was wait several minutes longer for the sunset, which produced real colour in the sky. I can say the result not only looks more natural than trying to get the above photo to look like a sunset, but was a heck of a lot more satisfying. Nature presents with great light, we just have to be open to it and be able to make the shot when it happens. Can you imagine how much more enriching it is to experience the light and take the shot than attempt to copy the conditions?The fact is that I have no problems finding the light to go my subjects, why would I want to try to digitally re-create it?

Kah Kit,

I think your style shouldn't be a dying breed. In this world where rock songs have a constant volume troughout the song, where HDR seems to be the new standard more natural and subtle looking beauty often gets overlooked. Although it is not yet as bed on photonet as on Flickr, to get attention one needs to show photographs with screaming colours that seem to be made by madmen with no connection with nature itself. Just look at the TRP.

I believe this is a wonderful image with beautiful light and subtle colours. If only more people would appreciate it.

Don't worry, my style is not a dying breed. You don't see serious magazines like National Geo or Outdoor Photographer publishing manipulated images. And most of the major landscape and travel photography competitions have strict rules about this too - often entries have to be single exposures only. However it does seem that heavily manipulated images are becoming more common on photo.net and flickr as you say. I don't set my sights on being on the TRP, my ambition is to be a top landscape photographer, respected by my peers. When I first joined photo.net 3 years ago, the standard on the first few pages of the TRP was filled by some truly exceptional photography. Now I rarely bother to look, it's a mere shadow of itself, most of the greats have left. Hopefully it won't get as bad as flickr, 99.9% of the HDR work there is abominable. I am not an HDR hater though, I think it is a legitimate tool and I know a handful of people who use it very well. The problem is the 99% who use HDR because they don't know how to expose properly and use it for everything without a thought of why it is necessary.

and kky... you have been REALLY good lately. I like your style. Marc is no doubt one of the greatest in landscape especially seascapes, most times his style is bold and overpowering, making one just bow down..like the king's order. Your style is different, it has love, softness and something to accommodate. Some may think it is more traditional. But there are only few emotions human can have, and yours brings out one of the beautiful one. Keep it up. Stick to it...stick to what you like. I admire your tremendous efforts and success you bring. Let that beauty flow easily and humbly in your pictures and what you write.

 

I wish you all the best.

 

Regards

+Lalit

Excelente imagen imagen de gran calidad, especial luz, color y belleza, un perfecto encuadre superior nitidez, Un abrazo Kah. PN non seven.

Buenisimos tonos y buenisima luz!

Not so sure I agree with Lamar. Although HDR has taken a life of its own, I believe it's a passing fad. HDR was created and designed to increase dynamic range that a camera normally would not be able to capture in one exposure, but now it has become a way to create cartoon like images. That's okay, but let's not confuse it with an increase in DR to properly capture a dramatic scene. Images like this will never die. Just like blue jeans, they will never pass or go out of style. In 10, 20, 30 years this type of photography will live on. HDRish images will have it's 15 minutes of fame and I suspect there will be other fads that will come and go too.

Thanks for your kind words Lalit. It is interesting that Marc was and continues to be an major inspiration to my work, yet we are poles apart in the emotions conveyed by our photography. Regarding HDR, I like it when it is done well. My friend Royce Howland is one of the best exponents and recently published online 50 page article on the subject on NSN. Here is HDR done properly.

http://naturescapes.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=134616&p=1369877#p1369877

A dying breed?? Not sure what circles you hang out in Lamar, but the art of finding and capturing the light as seen by the artist, is alive and well..probably stronger than its' ever been. I also enjoy looking at an artists "interpetation" of a scene, and sometimes take liberties in PP too..But, as Kah so eloquently stated, it's much more satisfying to get it right in the field, and not need excessive PP..

 

Your(Lamar's) interpetation of the scene is interesting, and obviously different from Kahs', but IMHO Kah's much better..

 

Wonderful image Kah..your work is inspirational for many of us..keep them coming :)

 

Regards,

 

David