Aspen Gold

Yours is perhaps the most compelling defense I have seen yet for having a preference for non-shopped images. Sometimes I think that I come back with too many mediocre pictures that I try to convert into something better with Photoshop, but the best ones are generally the ones that require little or no manipulation.

Hi Curtis...

You really know how to make an image work! I love the canopy effect formed by the outer ring of trees, the position, the shape, the color, and the texture of the dominant trees is just right -- as are the wonderful colored leaves underneath. But the dark and unsightly bark area at the base of the main trees really damage the otherwise beautiful photograph. I know that you could not control it. It's too bad that the silvery bark did not continue all the way to the ground! bob

to extreme? No, the effect ist very interesting. make it extremer, it's a nice perspective. roman

wow, what an interesting perspective of a nature photograph. you don't see many photos of nature with a fisheye lens that actually works. i like it, kudos Curtis.

Hmmmm, good because of the content or good because of the effect? I will go for the latter. Take away the fish eye and this is a picture of some tree's with yellow leaves. Where as I do applaud the thought of doing it I think this picture would just be one of a million "looking up a tree at the canopy" shots. Like any other effect used in photography (IR for example) the effect generated is really neat but after a while the underlying picture has to be sound and of interest to the viewer.

 

For me this just doesn't do it. But I will admit, that's just me. My tastes in nature work are radically different than the general publics I think... Congrats on POW!

I am curious, just being of a science background: Was this how the image looked in its "raw" format? Or was there cropping involved? The reason I ask is I notice a lack of aberration in the picture that I usually get when working with a wideangle/fisheye.

 

The colors are lovely. They remind me of the oversaturatedness of Velvia film. I don't think the effect is too extreme because you can still "place" yourself in the image -- you know that you're on the ground, looking up -- it doesn't have the "spinning 360" effect of a lot of fisheyes.

To say that this image would fail if shot with a longer focal length lens is a bit like saying butterflies wouldn't be as beautiful if they were moths. Butterflies are butterflies, and this image was shot with this lens. It's true that this image wouldn't be as dynamic if shot with a different lens but the photographer chose the lens he used for a reason. As we all know lens choice is a major concern when going for any shot, and I think the goal here was to use the distorting effects of a fisheye lens to offer a different perspective of a very common subject. To that end I congratulate Curtis for his effort.

 

Is it gimmicky? Perhaps, but I'm not overly concerned with that aspect. Gimmicky or not I imagine that a considerable amount of effort went in to the composition in an attempt to use the distorting effects of a fisheye lens to an advantage. In this I would say that Curtis was successful because I think it is a solid composition.

 

As for the issue of manipulation, I think this is commonly brought up as it relates to post production alterations in the digital realm. Lens choice, even a radical one such as this, does not in my view fall into the category of manipulation. Every lens distorts to some extent, and the photographer is free to use optical distortion as he see fits. It's just a part of the package we have available to us. If Curtis had achieved this effect in Photoshop then manipulation would be an issue, but he was probably flat on the ground composing this image on site.

 

Good shot.

Great colors and lighting. The darkness in the lower left corner is the only problem here. I don't have a problem with the fisheye effect and instead think that it adds to this image. I can almost imagine myself lying on the ground where this photo was taken looking up at the trees. I think the view might look a little like this photograph. The effect, in my opinion, isn't overdone here and this is a good situation in which to use such an effect.

Personally, I think I'd like this much better without the distortion. The idea of putting the camera on the ground, as well as your choice of composition is very good. The distortion just does little to enhance this aesthetically speaking in my opinion. However, it does make it a more *interesting* photograph!

The photo prompted me to do some research into the Aspen tree itself. I was amazed to find that this entire stand of trees could be one living organism. Just a bit of useless trivia to pass along where no other comment can be made.

 

The photo is super, evocative, inspiring!!!!!!!!!

Congratulation!...

This is what they call a double take looker. Just like when a pretty lady or a handsome man passes by.Got to look again and enjoy while it

last.

I like it ! In a world of cookie cutter "me too" nature photography, where everyone gets up to photograph the "alpenglow" from the rising sun striking some hillside, or does the wide angle with flowers in the foreground thing, or the birch grove from 50 yards, this is just something different. The leaves in the foreground are key; the lower left corner darkness maybe the only imperfection. I love how the placement of the horizon and the trunk of the tree follow fairly convential "rule of thirds" composition without appearing to do so; the image almost looks square at times. Just a fun & refreshing nature photo !

 

- Dennis

Thats a great extreme wide angle shot. The low angle helps enhance the effect. Its also good to see a winner that hasn't been manipulated.

Terrific Curtis. Another vote in agreement with the elves on this one - all the elements do work just great for me. A very eye-catching image, even if it is a little defiant of the conventional landscape ethos.

It screams FISHEYE . . . . but only to another photographer. A viewer without a photography background would certainly notice that the trees bow in, but is more likely to interpret that as the forest canopy that is an integral part of the composition which includes a featured tree and the fallen leaves. If you want to include forest, tree, and leaves, this is how you do it. Could the shadow have been avoided without increasing the risk of flare? Don't know, but unless you're shooting on an overcast day, that's a major challenge, as is trying to avoid unwanted elements with a lens that includes half the world in every shot.

 

Not perfect . . . but darn near.

Well I think that this shot needs the combination of the fisheye and the bold colors to work lose either and your left with a rather dull shot. If I had to say what is the strongest element the bold colors or the distortion caused by the fisheye I would probably say the distortion but only after checking out a greyscale version. On the whole this shot works very well because the elements come together nicely to create this rather graphic image.

I love the vignette (dark area) in the lower left. It works with the modelling of the other light on the trunk. Think classic painting. I often vignette either in camera or in the darkroom. Also, the design of the image may not be totally original, but it is a great "stock" image. Although to bad it was shot with a coolpix. Maximum size is?

At the beginning of my photography experience I spent a week in Aspen, Snow Mass, and Telluride. I was there during the changing of the Aspen trees. I know this is a marvelous time to be here and you have captured it perfectly. I am going back in the summer, hopefully I can bring back some worthwile shots. Congratulations on the POW.

AJM

I think this is a beautiful image with a great perspective and color. It's also an inspiring image that makes me want to run out and take pictures because it was shot with a small camera and a lot of creativity.

Congrats on the POW.

Curtis, it is hard to tell from the uploaded image anything about the tops of the trees. How well did the Coolpix do with resolution of the top branches?

I think this picture is both pleasing to the eye with color, and harsh to the eye with angle. I got a little dizzy looking at it. Any other lens or angle just wouldn't have done this picture justice. The fish-eye just gave the trees this illusion that they're taller than the sky, which I'm sure is what was wanted.

The colors are so strong it almost looks like a CGI. Simply amazing what a camera can catch sometimes, or rather, the person behind the lens...

And as for that shadow, who cares? There will never be a perfect photo. The imperfections show that it was more than just a camera that captured the image.

And the gnarl on the tree shows that nature is nothing BUT imperfection. I hate people who think that we have to catch perfection on film. That's so far from the truth about the world, and nature, that it's just... unrealistic. Every living thing has a flaw somewhere. Unlike some people, I like photographing the truth.

I can't say if I like the photo or not. I'm torn. I just want to see the original view before you looked through the lens. It just seems like such a gorgeous place.

Great Job.

Boy, I sure am getting a lot of likes and dislikes about this image! I was only trying to be a little creative and show an ant's eye view of a common scene. If you were to look at some of my other images in my portfolio at http://curtisforrester.imageculture.com (no www.), you will find that this type of image is not the only ones I shoot. Lannie, I beleive the Nikon CP5000 has good resolution, but this Nikon fish-eye converter lens isn't quite as sharp as the lens on the camera, as can be expected with any converter lens. The top of the image is a little soft both due to the edge sharpness of the lens and the extreme depth of field I was trying to capture here. The small aspen leaves that the camera is actually resting on are almost touching the lens! I plan to shoot more fish-eye type images along with my other work. I hope most of you enjoy seeing them.

Happy shooting!

I personally find the distortion a bit extreme to me. But, I

trust Curtis had good reasons to take this photo. I would not try

to force my idea on someone else and say "this photograph is not

why people photograph". "I will not photograph this way", perhaps,

but not other people.

 

Congratulations on the POTW!

Gorgeous shot, Curtis! I love the colors, the fairly straight perspective of the two foreground white birches, and the modern and geometric look to the leaves on the forest floor. Beautiful!

Hey Curtis, this is wonderful capture. Fisheye or not? this is someone else's quest. I say the effect is fantasttic.

 

Laura raised a good question, whether this is manipulated or not as it reminded her of the color happy velvia film. What I remember of being in the aspen groves at this time of the year is that first of all the sky turns so "clean" in the fall. The summer monsoons all gone, little or no clouds in the sky, very dry atmosphere. The richness of the blue in this photo is the way I remember it there, especially if you get to altitude where there is even less atmospheric elements to obscure this beautiful sky. Laura is an East Coaster as I am now and I can tell you back here we NEVER see this rich blue in the sky.

 

The aspen leaves are just as they show here too, vibrant!! When you see these two colors together it's just incredible, as your photo shows Curtis. This photo to me is the way you can see it in the flesh if you go there and have the right day. That you can see the foreground, trunks and canopy through the clever use of a fisheye lense is just a great thing. Thanks, Just my little opinion.

 

One more sentiment and I will go away..........the other time I can highly recommend to be in the Aspen groves is mid summer when the soft exterior bark of these beautiful leafy giants start to drink up some water and become quite green compared to their subdued & chalky look as seen in the fall. I remember camping up off Scofield Pass (West of Snowmass) at +/- 9500' above sea level, Gothic Peak, I think and being given a gift of witnessing a sunset "to die for". We were cooking diner under an Aspen grove, type of canopy you see in Curtis's pic, The sky darkened at sunset. When we looked up all of the trunks were lit by the small but bright fire we had. The color of the trunks a deep olive the sky deep rose. Such a time to not have a camera. :(

 

Thanks for sharing this one Curtis, another reason to start packing and get back to where I think I belong. Bradley