Aspen HDR

[casil403]

Submitting another attempt at aspen today....this time I took the tripod.
It was really quite foggy this morning so the sky was quite bland.
Lemme know your thoughts and appreciated as always.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2764/4033845738_236642703a_o.jpg

[Mad Aussie]

Great colours again. Again the sky is blown out a bit. However you explain why that was in this case.

Tell me ... how many exposures is this HDR made from?

Are they bracketed? And if so ... what increments? (1 stop apart ... 2 stops?)

For something like this where I see the darks in the forest and the brights of the sky I usually go for 2 stops over the 3 bracketed shots I use.
If you don't have auto bracketing then simply use manual mode and remember the first shutter speed you use (lets say it's 100) and then double one shot and half the other. So you get a shot at 50, 100 and 200. If you used 500 then you'd get 250, 500 and 1000. Whatever it takes to get a dark shot to get that sky right ... and a bright shot to get those darks with detail ... and a good shot that would work on it's own.

[casil403]

This is bracketed using 2 stops. Again, the sky was pretty lifeless and grey because of the fog. i managed to get a pretty dark shot to get the sky but there wasn't much to get.
I also punched the colours a bit in PP to get the white bark of the aspen to come out more so that might be what affected the sky.
I probably just suck at this type of shot maybe.

[Mad Aussie]

No no ... I wasn't saying it wasn't good. And if the sky was that lifeless then you'll never get anything from it.

HOWEVER, in that case, don't include the sky at all! In every shot after you've composed it and are ready to shoot ... take a second look .. .but instead of looking for what you DO want in the photo ... look for what you do NOT want.

You could have easilly dropped the angle of this shot to exclude that sky completely and include more of the lower trunks and grass.

[crystalb]

Hey at least you're giving it a shot.....at first you don't suceed, try try again :)

[Mad Aussie]

So far I think you are showing great potential in the 'subtle' HDR style as opposed to the more in your face HDR style many use ... like me. But now I lean far more toward the subtle unless I think the subject calls for something more obviously HDR.

[Michaelaw]

Technically it may have its faults I can't really comment there because I love the image so I'm biased:) Lovely shot Casil, I really like this one:highfive:

[MoinMoin]

I like this shot very much. Next time you should try to put a pinto horse into it ;-). Is here anyone who knows the name of this painter, who makes this landscapes with horses into it like optical illusions?

[casil403]

I like this shot very much. Next time you should try to put a pinto horse into it ;-). Is here anyone who knows the name of this painter, who makes this landscapes with horses into it like optical illusions?

Bev Doolittle...I remeber seeing her work back in a store about 20 years ago.

[zenon5940]

The type of HDR you do, Casil, is what is convincing me I should try it myself. I had bad impressions of HDR's at first because most of the ones I had seen were so "unreal" they would turn me off mainly because they looked too "artificial" .
On the other hand, yours are so close to reality that if you did not mention HDR I would just think it is another of your good photos.

I agree with MA that the sky "blown out" and that excluding it could improve this image.

[jlabel]

I think a lower level cutting the sky off would result in a more interesting picture