Toroweap

[Ben Egbert]

Jeffrey commented on the processing of this file so it is a good candidate for this forum. Anyone who wants can take a shoot at this.

Here is a link to a raw of this image. The jpg is SOOC.

https://we.tl/t-D9HqqCUNN3

 

[Jeffrey]

Probably too much but I was in a Grand Canyon mood....

 

[Ben Egbert]

Wow Jeffrey, it does seem a bit over the top here, even on the new calibration. But thanks for doing this. Tell me how you color managed this. Overall it seems too dark and too saturated.

 

[Jameel Hyder]

Here is how I would have tackled it if it was my image.

 

[AlanLichty]

My turn - I went for a more subtle take on this one.

 

[JimFox]

Probably too much but I was in a Grand Canyon mood....

View attachment 16023

This is a Grand Canyon looking mood.

 

[JimFox]

Here is how I would have tackled it if it was my image.

View attachment 16028

Super cool Jameel, I like your take on it.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I also like Jameel's version.

 

[Ben Egbert]

My turn - I went for a more subtle take on this one.

View attachment 16029

To tell the truth Alan, I did not find this a very photogenic place. There are only 2-3 places to get a view unless you want to take your life in your hands. And the light does not get down into the canyon the way I would like. The Canyon walls have a sort of gritty look to them which your version really shows.

On the other hand, I loved being here. There was only one other camper in the entire campground and they were 1/2 mile away. The weather was nice, the campground had some pinyon trees for shade. I could have spent a few days here.

 

[Jameel Hyder]

My turn - I went for a more subtle take on this one.

View attachment 16029

Like the sky you have here.

 

[Amy Nelson]

My version of what I imagine it would be.

 

[rfkiii]

Not sure what issue we are trying to fix but...

The RAW exhibits a much brighter image than the SOOC jpeg posted above and shows that you did a good job of ETTR. Since I was not there to gage the light levels, I sleuthed the EXIF for the time of the exposure. It said 9:07 pm (although there may have been a slight chance you forgot to set the camera to MDT making it 8:07 pm instead). I also took into account your original post as guidance to the prevailing EV. Who better would know the EV than the person there. So, here you go. Note: the image below has a reddish color not present in the image when viewed in PS. I edit in Prophoto. The color is added at the jpeg conversion stage but I do not know how to prevent it. This image viewed in PS looks closest in color to Alan's rendition above.

 

[Ben Egbert]

My version of what I imagine it would be.View attachment 16031

Thanks Amy, this is not far from what it looked like, but not as I would have liked it to look like. I guess I am spoiled by the more constant reddish rocks further north in Canyon Lands and Zion. The rock striations detract from that.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Not sure what issue we are trying to fix but...

The RAW exhibits a much brighter image than the SOOC jpeg posted above and shows that you did a good job of ETTR. Since I was not there to gage the light levels, I sleuthed the EXIF for the time of the exposure. It said 9:07 pm (although there may have been a slight chance you forgot to set the camera to MDT making it 8:07 pm instead). I also took into account your original post as guidance to the prevailing EV. Who better would know the EV than the person there. So, here you go. Note: the image below has a reddish color not present in the image when viewed in PS. I edit in Prophoto. The color is added at the jpeg conversion stage but I do not know how to prevent it. This image viewed in PS looks closest in color to Alan's rendition above.

View attachment 16033

Thanks Rick, this is very close to what I saw, the red helps IMO. But this is about as good as it gets there so you may not feel cheated if you can't get there. A great place to be and camp, but there are better photo location in the area.

 

[Jeffrey]

It was difficult to know what the actual light levels were at the time of exposure. I thought it was later in the sunset realm, as indicated by the dark and slightly warmer clouds, so I processed it in a way to emphasize the late day light and saturation that it provides. I think I may be wrong! A day later (now) I no longer like my processing decisions. I still think there was more color and contrast is the actual scene than many of the lighter and washed out versions I'm seeing here are showing. I've been to this place.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I think Rick might have the most accurate. I generally go for more pop than what was seen in person.

Jameel's has that extra pop.

 

[Jameel Hyder]

As artists we make choices both in what (and when and how) we capture images as well as what our final image looks like. The actual light or even objects in the scene are not the gating factors. We strive to get a particular emotional response from the viewer.

We do color corrections, clonng, selective sharpening, even convert a color image to monchrome etc to a prodce our final image. In my mind the only constraint is - is it believable? The rest lends itself to artistic licence.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Well said Jameel.

 

[rfkiii]

The actual light or even objects in the scene are not the gating factors. We strive to get a particular emotional response from the viewer.

Jameel, I may be the odd duck in landscape photography. My primary goal is to reproduce the scene exactly as I saw it or as near as possible within the confines of my memory of the scene and as near as digital editing will allow. (That's not to say I won't use editing tools to enhance a little bit and/or attempt to get rid of flare and glare and other nasties.) That's why I was going on about the light levels. If Ben had specified a fine art look, I probably could not have participated because I do not know how to do that type processing.