Sea Cave

[RbnDave]

This photo was pain. The area was backlit and the sky wanted to overexpose. Also, I had to climb around barefoot on sharp wet rocks with 50 degree water sloshing around my feet. Was it worth the effort?

I did some playing with photoshop to bring out details in the shadows. I also added some saturation. I like the extra blue look. What do you think? Too blue?

http://www.pbase.com/image/23196813/large.jpg

Thanks

Dave

[CyberDyneSystems]

Oh my god, yes It was worth the effort!!!!!!!

The light coming through the cave is spectacular!!!!

I am sorry that I have to say that the rocks in the forground that I think you worked hard to work into the image do not add anything. They are darkl and do not have the briliiant heavenly light that the cave and the formation to the left have...

If you took other images minus the foreground rocks,. I think you could get a better overall tone with that golden light.

Wow,. this is really stunning. :)

[iwatkins]

Dave,

That is stunning. I can say no more. :D

I would suggest you make more of a feature of the actual sea cave as the rock has nice colouring. I would also say if you are going to have the foreground rocks in place then ensure they are exposed correctly, or as I have done below, do it afterwards in post processing.

I don't usually mess with other peoples images, it doesn't feel right, but in this case, I couldn't resist. Hope you don't mind ?

Cheers

Ian

Modified version - Shadow/Highlight tool in CS, 15 seconds work

http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~iwatkins/Other/seacave.jpg

[RbnDave]

CDS-

Ask and you shall receive...


http://www.pbase.com/image/23216988/large.jpg



I took about fifteen pictures of this sea cave and changed lenses 3 times. This was the only time during my entire vacation I regretted not buying the Canon 17-40L. My Tokina 17mm was just too wide, my sigma 24-70 was too junky, and my Sigma 70-200 was too narrow. But, my Canon 50mm f1.8 fit just right. The only problem was, I had to wade in and out of the water three times to change lenses. I was paranoid I was going to drop my camera in the ocean at any moment. My dad lost a Nikon F1 and 300mm lens a few months ago trying to get an equally hairbrained picture when his tripod slipped off a coral reef.

Anyhow, I hope the colors aren't too over the top. I find I have to go a little nuts with saturation when I take a shadowy picture like this.

Also, on a side note. I learned a USM trick for dark photos like this. Set the amount to 20, the radius to 50, and the threshold to 0. The details in the shadows pop right out.

Dave

[RbnDave]

iwatkins,

Thanks for fixing my rocks (that didn't sound right, did it?). The rocks in your corrected version look great! I'll try to copy your effect.

As you can imagine, if I exposed the foreground correctly the sky would be blown out. I actually have two shots of this same image with blown out sky.

I knew when I took this picture, I was putting too many things into it and should just concentrate on the cave, but when you have a bag full of new lenses, you have to try them all :). See my above post for a closer shot of the sea cave.

The same day I took these photos, we stopped at a tourist shop and I saw a perfect picture of the same cave on a postcard. From what I could gather, the postcard photographer took his photo when the tide was lower and the surf wasn't so high. I wanted to get closer to the cave, but couldn't without a wet suit and a watertight camera.

Thanks again for the great edit!

Dave

[Leighow]

DAVE

It is a great shot. Without a boat! it is hard to say what to do. I tried a host of modifications and was not clear if -- from this vantage point -- I could better the scene.

1: I did find it required sharpening. I tried 30, 2, 0 . Then added a straight "sharpen" and found that the latter added a bit more gloss inside the hole.

2: I rotated the water a bit too.

3: I switched the mode to Adobe 1988 -- to highten the color of the cave's rays.

All of that was trival !


The main prob seemed to be the two bright points; (1) the cave and, (2) the V in the center of the composition -- assuming you can live with the lens-related foreground. So I tried to a pile of crops. Also, I liked a version flipped horizontally as it opens a sea road to center ground.

Anyway.. I blab.

It is beautiful, I hear you onnthe lens and wonder what the G2 at 35mm might have done.

As for your playing with color -- it is fine. You were there. You are the artist. Ansel Adams played at will with B & W to suit his vision.

Or something like that!

HOWIE

PS: I have been thinking about waders to acess ponds et al --- but I know from camer-free experiences that the bottoms of streams are very, very slippy. Poles maye be needed. Also, I have thought about bringing a ladder on some outings -- jut to get a different perspective.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Great shot.. both of them. Just a fabulous thing to be able to witness! I am glad you were ther dso that we can see too. :)

Howie, :)
especially when we are talking color,... we need to broaden horizons beyond the too often mention Adams...

....do a google of Elliot Porter and see if anything good comes up... he was a pioneer in color .. when others thought it was blasphemy!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hah! :D never mind,. Google lists his name number one alongside Adams in the Museum dedicated to the two of them in Boston...

I could not find a single one of his imagfes online. And here i thought he was "almost" as influencial as Adams.. lol

[Leighow]

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
Hah! :
I could not find a single one of his imagfes online. And here i thought he was "almost" as influencial as Adams.. lol

I did find an Eliot Porter
*******************
with one "L" and lots of images -- say for example:

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/collection.php?asn=P1990-51-672&mcat=3&scat=21

at

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/collection.php?mcat=3&scat=13
Looks like a great landscape photographer !

As regards the larger subjects (e.g. a tree) he seems to stick to a fairly tight space -- like one tree, or a dozen icicles where water has seeped thru a shale water table. In contrast, I tend to want to shoot a wider scene and the result is a busier image.

So too ... a few of his autum shots seem (here) to be taken in shade -- but the processing or film choice has led to strongly saturated colors.


I will look around re alterations.
*************************
Note too, that Luminous Landscape -- in its workflow -- crops and alters color to suit his purposes. So I say that alterations are fair game -- if it pleases you and you are not subject to any rules in the case of a competition.

HOWIE

PS-CDS: I will post under your Green Herons -- what may be my last shots of the Heron Year. Just because these birds are so great. You'd catch them wink with your big lens.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Doh!

Eliot... one L hah!

I should have known that.

Yes,. all my heron's have flown the coop :(

I will need to find something else to do this winter.

[RbnDave]

Howie,

Thanks for the compliments. This was a difficult photo. The light coming through the cave looked great, but a picture of a hole with light coming through it is not all that interesting. I had to add some elements. Unfortunately, everything surrounding the cave was in the shadows. I'm glad you like what I came up with.

On a completely different subject.... I bought a new monitor today! My color issues are solved. I wish I would have bought this monitor a year ago. This monitor is the best thing I ever did for my photography, maybe even more important than buying a 10D.

thanks again for the comments

Dave

[Laziferous]

Dave, that is absolutely fantastic. I think you did a fine job here. The light coming through that cave is as CDS said, heavenly. Just a wonderful photo.

[Daytripper]

Dave,

Really nice light Dave - I agree with the comments suggesting tha the forground needs to feature more prominently in this image - My suggestion in this situation would be to add a little fill flash to the rocks in the foreground... It would just add the 'icing on the cake' so to speak.

Cheers,
Peter

[alan-G3]

You got a load of responses so it must be "good". Despite reality I would "rotate" a little. The brain corrects for these effects; we see what we expect, not what is there but a picture forces the brain to see a "sometimes" unacceptable reality.

A fancy way of saying that it "looks like you tilted the camera" even if you didn't.

Regards

Alan

[martcol]

I enjoyed both photos and they show that a lot of thought/work went into the capture of the images and the processing. Of the two, I prefer the second one posted. It seems more dramatic and conveys a different mood to the other.

For me, the first is a seascape that is picturesque with a bit too much going on in the foreground although, I see exactly why they're there, I think the one big eliptical rock is a bit in your face and might work better if it was a bit blurred - I dunno, but I think I'd try. In fact I did and can email it to you if you want. I made a copy layer, blured it and used a layer mask and the gradient fill tool to build a mask around the rocks. Whilst there I took a bit of the blue out with a curves adjust. For me, I think that big ol' rock in the forground with the strong texture is too busy and it detracts from the shaft of light.

Now the second image does more for me! It's moody and dramatic and really draws me in. There's a greater emphasis on shaft of light and you can see further deail in it with what appears to be sea spray. This draws the viewer further in to the picture looking for the "story."

Really good work.

Martin