Jump to content
© Copyright © 2013 Stephen Penland

Mather Point Sunrise, Grand Canyon National Park


stp

Exposure Date: 2013:04:30 06:06:52;
Make: Canon;
Model: Canon EOS-1D Mark IV;
Exposure Time: 1/60.0 seconds s;
FNumber: f/10.0;
ISOSpeedRatings: ISO 100;
ExposureProgram: Other;
ExposureBiasValue: 0
MeteringMode: Other;
Flash: Flash did not fire;
FocalLength: 70.0 mm mm;
Software: Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Macintosh;

Copyright

© Copyright © 2013 Stephen Penland

From the category:

Landscape

· 290,304 images
  • 290,304 images
  • 1,000,004 image comments


Recommended Comments

Still trying to photograph a place that's hard to photograph. Two-shot

vertical pano that was cropped to eliminate the bland sky. Normally I'd like

to see more to the right, but it was nearly all in shadow, so I went with the

square. Your comments and suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks.

Link to comment

You balanced out the massifs of the rocks very nicely including the lighting. When you photographing the Grand Canyons, specially the details of it, you really do not need the sky or just a little slit of it. In this case, the last layers of the rocks nicely finishing the composition at the top. Personally, I would squeeze out a little more light on the rocks, a little more contrast, getting slightly darker the shadow areas, but it is a personal choice. Over all, it is a very nice image with deeps and 3d effect.

Cheers.

Link to comment

Bela, thanks for your comment.  I, too, was thinking a bit more brightness might be good.  But for now, I'll just leave this as early, early morning before the sun has hit very hard.

Link to comment

Everything looks good to me: color, light, contrast are all very well done. Very minor suggestion would be to clone out that tiny bit of light in the URC.

Link to comment

Dave, thanks for commenting.  That's a spot of orphaned light.  I usually clone orphaned leaves or branches that barely appear on an edge, and that should also apply to light (maybe especially light, because of it's ability to distract the viewer's eye).

Link to comment

Stephen,  I like the image as it is. It is quite sharp, the light is well balanced, and the bright sun light in the foreground feeds into the rest of the image for me.  I don't think I'd darken anything more (IMO) . You may want to decide if there are areas - such as the canyon behind the brightly lit foreground - where you want to open the shadows to reveal more detail.  To me this is personal preference.  I also like the square format in this image.  My, you have covered a lot of western national parks, great adventures.   Larry

Link to comment

It has so much depth, detail, and color, I'd be hard pressed to find anything to improve.

Link to comment

Larry, Dominick, and Juha, thanks for your comments.  Larry, I've opened the shadows considerably when processing the raw file.  You're right -- it is hard to know how much is enough, and it does vary among individuals.  Coming from film, I'm delighted to have the ability to open shadows at all.

Link to comment

The position of the patches of light and the overall degree of light and shadow balance are what seems to give the image depth and draw the viewer to study the distant details or rock strata. I think the light / shadow balance in the distant areas are perfect, though I might just selectively tweak the highlights in the foreground by decreasing them very slightly.

Overall though a breath taking vista and well thought out photograph.

 

Best Regards 

 

Alf 

Link to comment

Alf, thanks for your comment.  You've stated something that has always bothered me a bit about this photo, and that is the relatively large area of brightness in the left foreground.  Selective dodging and burning has never been a natural part of my workflow, but perhaps it should be, and this would be a good photo to include in such a workflow.

Link to comment

When you are late to the party and very good photographers have already made a critique, there is not much for me to say except that it is excellent. Any thoughts really would be in the realm of personal preference and maybe even my not recently calibrated monitor could factor in.

 

Just wondering if the rocks on the left looked like you saw them or could they have been a bit darker?  Just a question simply because I might have darkened that area with an associated reduction of saturation. Even if you did nothing, the image is still excellent.

All the very best and thank you for a recent critique. 

 

 

Link to comment

Tony, thanks for the comment.  I'm guessing that my meter might have been over-influenced by the shadows that occupy much of the frame, but with a histogram I can't really use that excuse any longer.  The lit portions on the red rocks in the background look pretty close to me, perhaps even slightly underexposed.  So I'm making an educated guess that most of the brightness is pretty close to what I saw.  That doesn't necessarily mean, however, that I can't try to dodge and burn to render it closer to what a moving eye would see in each individual component.

Link to comment

I saw this the other day but didn't have time to comment.  I was struck by the vivid colors and lack of haze that is so often in the G.C.  That could be partly a result of your expert processing.  I really like what you've done with this, but I'll just throw out an idea.  The first thing that struck me was how bright the yellow cliff is compared to the rest of the image.  It is what is is though, and that's also part of the appeal of this image.  What if you were to slightly crop (about 1/3) off the left side?  For some reason I can't copy your images and 'play' with them myself, but when I held up a piece of paper to cover it, I do think it reduced the brightness effect.  On the other hand, it's hard to remove anything from such a grand vista as this.  Overall, it's excellent as is, and I'd be proud to have something this good from the G.C. 

Link to comment

Christal, thanks for the comment.  I usually try to compose in the viewfinder, so if I were to reduce the brightness of the yellow rock, I'd probably try either a bit of burning or Nik software to reduce the brightness of just the rock. This is pretty much what I saw, but that doesn't mean this is what I must therefore show in a processed print.

Link to comment

Hi Stephen,

  Beautiful scene with wonderful details & lighting.  This image really shows the depth of the canyon as well as the beauty.  Take care, Patsy

Link to comment

Wow, what a grand perspective.  Your wings must have grown very tired as you hovered over this image. What a magnificent site.  It must have been awesome just to be there much less have the opportunity to capture some it's grandeur.  Well done and thanks so much for your recent comment, rek. 

 

Link to comment

I too agree that the brightness of the rocks on the left is a tad too high but it's very subjective and no deal breaker.  Most, going to the Grand Canyon, would likely opt for their wide angle.  Through the use of your tele - zoom you've demonstrated beautifully that 'getting it all in' is not necessarily the best approach. I also agree with Bela on eliminating the likely distracting sky area though I must admit the patch of light in the URC would easily have been missed by me had it not been pointed out.  That too would not be a deal breaker for me.  Love the overall sharpness.  You chose your aperture and point of focus well.  Best, LM.

Link to comment

A very nice capture of a subject that I really struggle with. The light, textures and colors all blend together seamlessly. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...