SeaCave Sunset (Best Viewed Large)

Thanks.

Very nicely done, Vincent. Color and framing are perfect. Cheers, Jeff.

Very nice. I really find the shape of the opening creative, and of course the actual sunset's colors are incredible. The only area of the photo I don't like as mch is the reddish foreground, which may be adjustable in an image editor. What film did you use btw?

 

GB

Thanks for the comments. I almost always use Velvia 50 Greg, as I did here. Also, I uploaded a larger view (even though it lessens the quality of the default, smaller view), to look at the foreground elements you mentioned. On my two monitors, I see a somewhat dark foreground moreso than a red one... (which was the case since this was taken just before the light left altogether). Though with the darkness and the amber colors in the sky those might somewhat reflect in the foreground to a degree too. I will look over the big file later on just to be sure. Thanks for taking the time.

Love love love this photo! so beautiful, especially love the shape "cut-out" with the view of the ocean and sunset on the other side! Great work!! reminds me of a postcard or poster...

Really beautiful photo! I like it very much. Best regards, Ivana.

This is realy magic. The composition of this photo are great and the colours and light excellent. It is a pleasure to look at. Regards LKV.

Very imaginative, the colors are magical I agree. The feeling of the tide coming into the cave gives it some nice energy.

Excellent Vincent! Just awesome. - Sean

A real masterpiece. A fantastic imaginative photo with excellent composition and color as always. Congrats. Best regards, Alex!

Excellent colors and cropping. Bravo my friend. Michael.

Superb photo!

Ahh yes - your living room window - I knew it ...

 

Very well done Vince - Excellent exposure on the inside of the cave - must mean you tunneled your way in? - I like how the opening mimicks the head of a small dog ... (-;

Heyyy I've missed you ....... (-;

Beautiful exposure and Vincent Tylor colors all the way around. This is one situation in which a digital HDR may bring out more details in the shadows in the cave.

Nice to see another seascape from you Vince. Must be an Australian sheepdog judging from the resemblance to the Australian mainland. The colours and balance are, as usual, very good. However, to my taste, the amount of black in the upper half is a bit dominating. Although I can understand the desire to work within the constraints of a single capture, I agree with Jay that blending 2 or more exposures might give a better result in a case like this.

ALL of your comments and opinions are appreciated. Nice to see you too KW. Been a while. P-net is not quite what it used to be, though I still try to keep my hand in the pot from time to time. How have you enjoyed that new D200? Yes, this would be the living room view I've always wanted. Though I'd assume my television, computers, camera gear, scanner etc would be useless after about six months...

 

I do know that the high-end digital outfits do have better dynamic range capabilities Jay, and thus would handle many of the contrasting lighting conditions better than what film is capable of doing. Digital has other advantages as well; the obvious being no film or developing costs, instant results, more images to a memory card than to a roll of film etc. For me the greatest advantage though would be the elimination of scanning altogether. But the digital-film battle, in my mind is not as lopsided as some seem to believe. For one thing, I do own an original transparency when all is said and done. One that has been proven to be just about as colorful 50 years later if stored correctly. There is some real piece of mind knowing this. Velvia 50 is still the best film anywhere in my opinion. And Fuji plans to re-introduce this in the Spring of 2007. When I am capturing the blues and greens of the Hawaiian Islands, there is no digital outfit that I have seen yet, anywhere, which can duplicate what a beautiful slide will offer. My son uses Nikon's flagship D2X and is still blown away when he sees what my Velvia 50 transparencies look like. Contrast, wow factor, intense colors, deep shadows are all, still, as good as it gets today in Dec 2006. I also like using my wide-angle 2.8 glass (which would be fine with Cannon Mark II, but then that's still an $8,000 camera to lug around the shoreline, hikes to waterfalls, worries about leaving in your car etc), but with Nikon digital outfits there is no 2.8 super-wide angle glass. I can also scan 35mm originals up to 40x60 with VERY little compromise in image quality. Of course it takes a $47,000 scanner to do that, but since this is what I have been paying for, it does help to be able to have that capability. I can also buy an almost new F5 today for $600 on ebay. I get to use two outfits at one time when traveling to give myself the best opportunity to capture a winning image.

 

So yes, while I am quite aware that digital does have current advantages, and will only gain more advantages in time, it's not ALL in Digital's favor at this time. At least not in my opinion as of this moment. I would guess that within the next two years or sooner, I will make the jump, perhaps with the Nikon D3X or even a possible shift to Cannon if needed. But not quite yet. When I edited this image I was capable of bringing a little more detail from those shadows that what you see here. I believe the print will reflect that, though have yet to send out for that first proof.

 

I do recognize the value H.D.R.I Richard. Yet all is not so smooth when you have ANY kind of movement at all in the scene. Breezy trade-winds are a part of life here. And I would also think that such a concept would not work very well if at all with longer seascape exposures like this. I'd be curious to hear your own thoughts/experiences if any, with HDRI. (High Dynamic Range Imaging for those unfamiliar, where you take more than one image, at different densities and combine them through Photoshop or other integration software). It has its limitations and issues for sure. If you can get it done correctly in one shot with the proper use of filters then i'd rather not have to mess with all the other masking and "stuff" needed. As it is, I am already far too backed up in editing. : )

 

As for the abundance of dark space: I shot MOST of this series much closer-in than what you see here, significantly reducing the amount of darker areas. However, for some reason, INCLUSION of the top portion of the cave seemed to offer significant value to me when I took these slides to the light-box. To get in closer then, as well as minimize the darkness of the image overall, the top of the cave must go. There is just No way around that. I showed this series to my wife as well as my son (who has a pretty good eye) and both preferred this version where you get all of the cave at the expense of a greater amount of darkened areas. In fact I also believe this image is just a bit right-side heavy, but chose to leave it un-cropped, as it is anyway due to the value of having some pretty good lighting on that side. The print proofs will let me know what's next with this.

 

Hope this addresses your thoughts. Once again, I appreciate all of you taking the time. Is almost like old times over here... where's Walter....

 

A hui hou.

You dont even need HDR for this. Just use your film camera, take two exposures...overlay them in PS, and paint out the darker layer just in the upper left portion of this image, revealing the lighter, more detail filled exposure.

 

That being said...I actually like the darker cave. It adds more mystery in this scene.

 

It is good to see more work from you...

I'm not so sure about HDR anyway ... I mean, there are some nice HDR shots out there ... but can't a good photo just be a good photo any more?

 

SOOOoooooo ... it's GREAT to see you posting again, Vincent. Some of us need a "dose" of one of your landscapes every once in a while. :-) This one doesn't disappoint. It's a bit different than your usual, with the dark framing, but I like the difference. Makes me want to walk on through the opening of the cave into the scene. The colors are nice, too.

 

Regards!

I like the way the cave provides a natural frame to the water and sunset. The foreground is reddish, but it looks natural to me because it's what I'd expect to see with a sunset scene. Very nice, Vincent!

It's cold and gray here so this is a great way to start my morning. I've always loved the colors you've conveyed in your images and this one may now be my favorite! I love the cave just as it is...it provides a perfect frame and really adds interest. The tendrils hanging down from the ceiling are a nice touch and the cave floor on my monitor is slightly red, but I like that...the detail in the rock there is great. Keep sharing your paradise for those of us out here in the cold. Maybe someday I'll get to see these scenes firsthand. Take care.

 

Leslie

Lovely exposure and composition as always Vincent.

It's good to see you posting again, Vince, and bringing a bit of paradise our way. . lovely natural framing and colors and a bit of a primitive feel in this image. . I think I would like to see a little more detail in the blacks in the upper left hand corner. . I don't know anything about working with slides. . are multiple exposures a possibility ?. . . very nicey seen.

Vince, unfortunately I was not speaking from experience when suggesting a blend of 2 exposures. Although you raise the issue of movement in combining longer exposures, it seems that should not be a problem here. Everything that might move would be captured in the single exposure for the high EV levels. The details for the inside of the cave in the low EV level exposure would be stationary. One thing I find interesting in the response to this image is that the dark areas bother some people but not others. I wonder if that might be subject to the size of the image? I know I am more tolerant of featureless dark regions in smaller than in large prints. Have you found this to be reflected in your sales? Cheers.

Here is an image my son Scott took from this location about two months before mine. He used the D2X. In fact I stole his idea you might say, since I never knew this place existed... bad Daddy!

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5051621&size=lg

 

Obviously we have much greater cave detail in his version. However, I too have some that look like this, taken much earlier in the shoot. The one I posted is actually very near the end of the end, which is perhaps why I found it to have more appeal. A darker, somewhat more dramatic capture than when everything was lit up earlier. Though I did scan one of those versions and will eventually get to editing and posting. It is a different shot altogether. I will also be sure to get back here in the summer when those turquoise waters are intense and gorgeous.

 

Richard,

 

In my opinion this image would be more appealing as a large print as long as I get enough detail in those shadows. We'll soon see. This is why the larger version looks so much better in my mind than the default smaller one, since you can see more of that detail.

 

Sales usually are consistent accross the board regardless of size unless I accidentally over-sharpened, which has happened when I first started out doing this. The larger ones then can be less appealing. Even though we sell many more smaller prints than larger, due to affordability, and ease of finding a home in one's house, we still sell quite a few large ones as well. But the main advantage of having a location sell the larger ones is because they actually capture the attention of the customer and bring them over to the entire display. In other words, the larger prints sell the smaller ones. But I do hear what you are saying; that one can get away with a few little problems with a smaller version than with a 24x36. The key is to avoid putting inferior images out at all. Sometimes we have learned this the hard way...

 

Many thanks again to all of you for sharing your thoughts. Is always helpful and always appreciated!