Dried tree at sunrise

[milosh]

Hello folks,

guess it's time for me to upload a photo already.

I took this shot maybe two weeks ago and it took me a lot to process it. There was pretty big dynamic range in this photo, and since it was only one exposure (couldn't use the tripod), I had to lower the exposure in post-processing. I did majority of the work in ACR and the rest in PS. The sky was darkened with a gradient, the tree brightened using adjustment brush, contrast with curves, wb, some saturation, and then in PS some more brightening of the tree, midtone contrast, adding saturation, and finally sharpening.


I would like to hear your opinion whether or not this tree is strong enough as a subject to stand on it's own, and make the image? Second, what do you think of the colours and saturation. Do you find the colours natural looking and believable? Would you like to see some more saturation? And of course, feel free to throw in any other comments if you like.


I uploaded this image as a private image on Flickr (I don't want to make it public until I hear your thoughts).
So, I cannot embed the image here directly, so I hope you don't mind clicking the link to see it. Thanks!


http://flickr.com/gp/26469995@N03/E2QS46

Edit: I forgot the exif but I can't turn on my computer right now to post it since I don't have time. I'll add it later. It was shot as raw file with Nikon D60, Nikkor 18-105mm lens, at ISO 200. I'm not sure about the shutter speed and aperture.

[windrider86]

I'd bet you'd get more responses if you posted your image here. Much easier to critique of we dont have to flip back and forth from one page to another

[karen_s]

Tree strong enough? Yes, for me the tree is interesting enough on its own. But, I am a tree lover so I am easily pleased.

What do I think of the colors? Colors and saturation look pretty good. I really like how the foreground reflects the colors of the sky.

Natural? For the most part yes. The only odd thing I see is where the branches hit the orange of the sky. It looks like there is a pretty strong halo of white around the branches. This could just be Flickrs sharpening but I have had this happen to me when I have tried to bring some life to blown skies or over sharpened. Flickr has done it too me too.

More saturation? No. I like the softness of what you have. It says "serene calm morning".

The only other thing I could add is that the lower third of the tree gets a bit lost in the background. There is just enough definition to get by though as I think you did a pretty nice job with what was probably a difficult exposure for the camera. When I shoot trees, I often find myself on my belly or crouched in a ditch in an effort to get as low as possible so that I can line the bottom of the tree up with the horizon line. Can't always find that perspective but I always look.

Overall, very nice.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by windrider86

I'd bet you'd get more responses if you posted your image here. Much easier to critique of we dont have to flip back and forth from one page to another

Yeah, I know. But I didn't know that I can embed it even if it's private (may have to do something with the guest pass).

So, sorry about that, here's the image:



And the Exif:

Nikon D60
Nikkor 18-105mm @ 58mm
Aperture: f8
Shutter speed: 1/80
ISO: 200
Exp. Compensation: 0 EV

Originally Posted by karen_s

Tree strong enough? Yes, for me the tree is interesting enough on its own. But, I am a tree lover so I am easily pleased.

What do I think of the colors? Colors and saturation look pretty good. I really like how the foreground reflects the colors of the sky.

Natural? For the most part yes. The only odd thing I see is where the branches hit the orange of the sky. It looks like there is a pretty strong halo of white around the branches. This could just be Flickrs sharpening but I have had this happen to me when I have tried to bring some life to blown skies or over sharpened. Flickr has done it too me too.

More saturation? No. I like the softness of what you have. It says "serene calm morning".

The only other thing I could add is that the lower third of the tree gets a bit lost in the background. There is just enough definition to get by though as I think you did a pretty nice job with what was probably a difficult exposure for the camera. When I shoot trees, I often find myself on my belly or crouched in a ditch in an effort to get as low as possible so that I can line the bottom of the tree up with the horizon line. Can't always find that perspective but I always look.

Overall, very nice.

Thanks Karen for your critique. Can you please try to be more specific about the halo? Where exactly are you seeing it? Is it the branches of the big/main tree? I am looking at the large version and trying really hard to see the halo but I really can't see any. I'm very curious to see what others will say about this. There were some halos during pp, but I took rid of them in ACR.
Yeah, I'm aware that the lower part isn't separated from the background as it could have been. I have a couple of shots with lower POV, but overall, this one was the most pleasing for me.

[cmletts]

Might be mistaken, but I think the "halo" being referred to is the band of white that is sort of emanating from the top of the tree line in the background. Sort of gives the trees a bit of a "washed out" look. Also feels a bit like an unnatural transition between the orange sky and the top of the trees. But then again...it's sort of reminiscent of an early morning fog or misty haze that you would see in a field at daybreak. I'm not sure it seriously detracts from the picture overall. I'm interested to hear opinions from some others on this...

Anyway, beyond nitpicking, I do think the subject matter is striking and I love the colors in the field. Overall, a very good piece of work.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by cmletts

Might be mistaken, but I think the "halo" being referred to is the band of white that is sort of emanating from the top of the tree line in the background. Sort of gives the trees a bit of a "washed out" look. Also feels a bit like an unnatural transition between the orange sky and the top of the trees. But then again...it's sort of reminiscent of an early morning fog or misty haze that you would see in a field at daybreak. I'm not sure it seriously detracts from the picture overall. I'm interested to hear opinions from some others on this...

Anyway, beyond nitpicking, I do think the subject matter is striking and I love the colors in the field. Overall, a very good piece of work.

Oh, that "halo"! Just ten minutes ago, I had one more look at it, and it came to my mind "that must be the halo they're mentioning!". But, that's not a halo. It's actually a mountain far away in the background, and it's recorded like this, it's much more brighter than the sky above it, probably because of the haze. Here's a 100% crop of that area. And, thanks!

[cmletts]

Aha! Mountains. Well, now I feel silly for saying it looked like an unnatural transition.

[karen_s]

Originally Posted by milosh

Thanks Karen for your critique. Can you please try to be more specific about the halo? Where exactly are you seeing it? Is it the branches of the big/main tree? I am looking at the large version and trying really hard to see the halo but I really can't see any. I'm very curious to see what others will say about this. There were some halos during pp, but I took rid of them in ACR.
Yeah, I'm aware that the lower part isn't separated from the background as it could have been. I have a couple of shots with lower POV, but overall, this one was the most pleasing for me.

OK, I checked out the large version on flickr and the halo (I'm taking about the thin white edge on the branches of the main tree) are almost non existant. What I'm seeing is probably just flickrs sharpening of the image when resizing on upload. That has happened to me on more than one occasion. The largest size looks fine but the compression can be whacky at times. So, never mind.

And I like this version too. If you like this one best of all your shots, then trust yourself in the selection. It is a great subject.

[SwissJon]

Hey.. Way to go to prove me wrong I said HDR had no place in landscape photography in my opinion, now I'm wanting to eat my words, cos I'd love to see you stick this through the HDR process and see what you get.

I think this is a really nice piece of work Milosh.. I think your post processing has been done sympathetically and to very good effect. I'm really struggling to find something negative to say about it. The exposure is good, the colours are great, I love the almost back to front colour pop with the beautiful colours in the sky and the almost greyscale subject.

Well done mate.. definitely a piece of art.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by cmletts

Aha! Mountains. Well, now I feel silly for saying it looked like an unnatural transition.

There's no need for you too feel silly, it does look like that. It doesn't matter it's a natural object, it's being shown in a pretty unnatural way. I wouldn't be surprised if someone else besides you mistakes it for a processing error. Maybe someone would clone it out, but I'll leave it like it is.

Originally Posted by karen_s

OK, I checked out the large version on flickr and the halo (I'm taking about the thin white edge on the branches of the main tree) are almost non existant. What I'm seeing is probably just flickrs sharpening of the image when resizing on upload. That has happened to me on more than one occasion. The largest size looks fine but the compression can be whacky at times. So, never mind.

And I like this version too. If you like this one best of all your shots, then trust yourself in the selection. It is a great subject.

When I uploaded this image, I made it in three different resolutions (500, 800 and 1024 pix. on the longer side) and three different sharpening levels (so, a total of 9 images). I uploaded all of them and then inspected them thoroughly on Flickr, for detail and sharpness. I have found that the 800 pix. is the best, especially when viewed in the lightbox. I then increased sharpening even more until it looked OK and uploaded that version.

Originally Posted by SwissJon

Hey.. Way to go to prove me wrong I said HDR had no place in landscape photography in my opinion, now I'm wanting to eat my words, cos I'd love to see you stick this through the HDR process and see what you get.

I think this is a really nice piece of work Milosh.. I think your post processing has been done sympathetically and to very good effect. I'm really struggling to find something negative to say about it. The exposure is good, the colours are great, I love the almost back to front colour pop with the beautiful colours in the sky and the almost greyscale subject.

Well done mate.. definitely a piece of art.

Hey, thanks! I think you're being too generous with your comments. I don't think it would be a good subject for an HDR. And it was one exposure anyway.