Bryce Canyon, Utah (US National Park)

This is the view from an overlook at sunrise, Bryce Canyon National

Park, State of Utah, USA. Your ratings and critiques are invited and

most welcome. If you rate harshly or very critically, please submit

a helpful and constructive comment; please share your superior

photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks!

Enjoy! John

Very nice to this familiar shot in black and white! Very nicely done...congrats...LJ

Wow, that is a good quality photo. I should learn how to capture such a good view, from you and Ansel Adams. Congratulations Sir !

This is a stunning shot in color, but yesterday, when I looked at it, I said to myself 'how about a desaturation?'

 

I threw it into Photoshop CS3 and applied Black and White filter to it, adjusted the color slilders, and upped the contrast a tad, and here it is.

 

What was stunning in color (really, stunning), also makes a more than acceptable B&W capture.

 

And, it's an entirely different photo -- red dominates the other capture - here it's composition and textures from the hillside to the translucence of the 'hoodoos' (those semi-translucent spires) and the erosion, made more dramatic by the sunrise.

 

I'm very proud of this single shot which works well in color and B&W. (It's posted in color on another service, which, out of courtesy to this one, I won't link here (you'll have to find it on your own if you're curious.)

 

Thanks for taking the time to comment.

 

John (Crosley)

There was a time when to hear my name in same breath with Cartier-Bresson's was my dearest wish (and it still is, truth be told), and that is satisfaction enough.

 

But to see my name in print along with that of Ansel Adams -- wow, what a comparison. Well, Adams was a printmaster, and here I used the metering of the D2Xs, but lowered it through 'easy exposure' by a stop or two, through trial and error, to get the full range of tonalities, then upped the contrast a little after desaturation.

 

I suppose Adams would have chosen a numbered paper for more contrast - papers were numbered from very low contrast to very high contrast when he was printing and now it's done with filters for much of true darkroom printing (different filter equals different contrast.)

 

But this is entirely a digital shot.

 

If I were taking it again, I would turn my camera to the vertical, then take about five photos or six from left to right (or reverse) on a completely 0% horiontal axis (vertical/portrait orientation for each frame) with about 20-30% overlap on each photo, all with a fixed focal length lens (no zoom creep) with my metering set to manual (no variance in exposure due to pointing the lens in a different direction as in through-the-lens metering -- essentially turning that feature 'off' after initial readings).

 

Then I'd 'stitch' the frames together in Photoshop or some other image-stitching program, and it would be a stunning panorama, with terrific detail throughout (It'd also take a huge moonitor to play around with such an image -- but such an image would exceed anything a huge film camera could take or equal it at least.)

 

I know a terrific 'fine arts' amateur who works for a photo store who does just that - he sells printers, mainly by showing what 'can be done' by personally printing his own work while he's on the job.

 

He COULD BE considered one of the greats, but he hasn't been exposed yet, and I am told landscapes are 'out of vogue' and 'don't sell' in galleries. I did share with him some of the secrets to gallery exposure I've learned, but we'll see if he can make use of them.

 

Despite drawbacks, for anything really good, there is a market, even if not among traditional collectors.

 

I could envision in my travels taking time out from 'shooting people' to take similar shots with a very, very steady tripod, stitching five or six or them together (or having it done by my resident Ukrainian Photoshopper (in Ukraine) for me, as it's time-consuming, requires some substantial skill, it's very labor-intensive and time-consuming, plus my photoshop guy is very inexpensive for the equivalent of being a master photoshopper, and I can do better taking photos than actually playing around with my captures.

 

I actually need a master Photoshopper, and I think now for important stuff I have one. (I do all my own image editing for Photo.net and net postings.)

 

Thanks for making the favorable comparison of my work and that of Ansel Adams - that made my day, for sure!

 

If you can believe it, this is a hand-held, one-off shot -- there are not two of these on the set - just this one frame that I can find. I took others from other directions, with my 70~200 V.R., E.D. zoom, but they didn't look as good compositionally - though the colors were wonderful.

 

This works I think in black and white in part because of good composition.

 

Thanks for sharing your views.

 

John (Crosley)

And without sleep from driving all night, here I was perched on the rim of Bryce Canyon with not exactly a straight vertical drop but maybe a 75degree killer tumble ass-over-teakettle drop that would surely break a neck or worse -- a real killer.

 

And there is no guard rail here -- even kids can go to the side -- I suppose they haven't lost anyone for a long time (other places where it's purely a vertical drop, there are restraining wire mesh barriers on overlooks).

 

It's a natural, national park, I supposse, but I was a little quesy as I took this one.

 

Still, I'd do it again -- just take some anti-anxiety medication beforehand I suppose and approach that canyon rim again.

 

After all, the fright lasts just a few minutes while one is near the rim, but the photos live on as long as people will look at them, and I can post them. . . .

 

John (Crosley)

Majestic! The alternating layers of light intensity is just enthralling. Excellent B&W choice highlighting the textures and luminosity of this landscape.

Thanks for giving this your most glowing praise. I know you like my photography, but I also know when you don't comment on a photo or hold back your praise -- I can feel it.

 

But not this photo -- you and I both know it's one of the best of the best.

 

And, it's a L A N D S C A P E in B&W from John.

 

I wrote recently about the education of Barack Obama at Columbia College, Columbia University and how they teach the same core curriculum from the same basic books when he went there as I studied -- almost unchanged.

 

An institution like that teaches people to 'think' - rather than teaching them 'subjects'. Sure, you learn a subject, but you also learn an approach to the new and different in life -- an approach that serves well in an ever-changing society. In effect, its trainging was among the best for a society in which people now are to keep changing jobs.

 

And it breeds Renaissance thinkers. I'm not just a landscape photographer (the day I took this), but also a portraitist, a street photographer, a documentary photographer, a nature photographer (think birds), and more.

 

All I hope to do with photography is take worthy, interesting photos, and if I'm one place, i'll take one kind of photo, and another, I'll take another kind of photo.

 

Here I was at a national park, with rather a large number of professionals around me, hoping to immortalize that sunrise (not elbow to elbow, but you get the idea -- lots of expensive gear and big cameras and even an assistant or two -- nice outfitted photographers' SUVs).

 

But I think I did as well or better than any of them for that morning.

 

Then I went to bed, having been up all night driving.

 

This was one of my first photos at Bryce Canyon, and because of the sunrise (and the translucence of the 'hoodoos' -- spires or towers -- also the best of the bunch.

 

That translucence only shows for a fraction of an hour each day, then disappears, and the towers turn more stonelike in appearance than agatelike.

 

Best to you this winter/spring day in California.

 

John (Crosley)

You have many hats and you wear each one of them handsomely and with confidence.

 

The ability to adapt to change and survive is one of the most important traits that any person can have. I grew up influenced by several different cultures and as a young boy I always admired the chameleon for its ability to camouflage itself. In a way, I have incorporated the best qualities of all these cultures that I grew up with and became some sort of "chameleon" myself. Multiculturalism is a double edge sword, it can kill you or you can use it to your advantage.

 

This one is a winner my dear John. A masterpiece if you will.

I used to see you mostly a "street" photographer as far as genres go. Now you come with a very good landscape photograph. I have read elsewhere (don't remember now) that a photographer should limit his scope to a narrow field to be succesful. Sports, portrait, landscape, photojournalism etc. I really don't know how helpful that advice was. What do you think?

You say that narrowing one's scope of photography can make one more 'successful'.

 

That is true, at least from a financial standpoint.

 

How many 'commercial' assignments of Ansel Adams became famous? He did them, did you know, to pay the house payment and buy food.

 

But he didn't trumpet it and instead promoted his 'serious' work.

 

Some, but not all, SUCCESSFUL, photographers can cross genres, but it's the exception, not the rule.

 

But that is 'artistically' successful or 'commercially successful' - and I am neither of those things, yet.

 

But I am being promoted by some serious people -- now and in the recent past -- for serious gallery exhibition and I am writing one or more books (see my Presentation: 'Photographers: Watch Your Background' to get an idea of a rough draft for one -- polish that one up and it's a book -- even a textbook for photography students -- and of course flesh it out and finish the commentary -- it's a work in progress still -- hampered by inadequte site software.)

 

One past promoter of great depth who reviewed my entire 2 terabyte portfolio is a Lucie Award Winner (Academy Awards equivalent in photographic arts), and another is a former famous magazine photographer who was very big in New York City -- a man so famous he trademarked his name, AND gets royalties because it was licensed for the name of a perfume -- very substantial royalty payments, too, if i understand correctly.

 

He's agreed to review my gallery submissions -- he is the kind of guy who knew Richard Avedon as 'Dick'. We probably meet again this week.

 

But I am not 'successful' either artistically in terms of having my work in galleries and museums, although I am being touted for that, nor do I do any commercial work at this time -- so I cannot be an example for the 'successful' photographer.

 

But I am now well known, and this photo is over one year old (didn't tell you that, did I? But I could take it again today)

 

In essence, I feel the versatile photographer may not be more 'marketable' but he'll be able to make something of any sort of assignment.

 

That's why I have always looked for indicia of excellence outside of Photo.net's fishbowl.

 

I look for the best and most interesting throughout the photography world; in books, magazines, galleries, art galleries, and in day-to-day exposure to photo projects -- and images surround us daily.

 

I always looked to B&W Magazine, though I do not take large format B&W captures (though I think I could if I wanted, as I prize versatility).

 

In fact, that's it; I prize versatility.

 

I hope my 'talent', such as it is, is not something that is confined to a genre but to photography in general. I like to think that making, creating, or even capturing a good photo is something that is enhanced by taking 'street' photos -- where things sometimes must be done with split-second timing.

 

Imagine how fast I work in my portable studio doing nudes or portraits (I don't show those, or even HD video, which I also don't show).

 

I believe in the Renaissance ideal; I was educated to it; and it keeps life more interesting as I sometimes have had problems when I got bored. I try to keep out of trouble from boredom, and this is a great way to do it.

 

There in fact are few photographers of 'success' who cross genres: perhaps I'll test that. Maybe I'll be forced financially to settle into one or another -- street is my first love, but I hope I can do almost anything -- after all, finally it's in the photographer's 'eye' as well as mastering one's equipment and knowledge of the fundamentals of the use of light, from whatever source -- photography: writing with light, and basically it's all got the same roots -- just the applications vary.

 

I also have an appreciation of more than one point of view-- and also see with more than one point of view -- am I the original 'ambiguous man'?

 

I don't think so, but someone may say that, if I don't end up specializing, but in the meantime, I hope to be able to make a living doing whatever comes my way.

 

Thanks for your fine compliment.

 

It has made my day.

 

John (Crosley)