Heavy Fog at Racoon Creek
Sep 6, 2012 23:45:04 #
The early morning fog was so heavy, accurate focusing was nearly impossible. It is not that the water and sky could not be photographed - they were not visible in the cloud of moisture.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
Sep 7, 2012 04:52:02 #
At first glance I thought, overexposed. After studying in detail, I find I like it very much. The tonal range is quite dramatic - well taken.
Sep 7, 2012 07:33:42 #
VERY nicely done! you have accomplished what every photographer desires. that is to capture the attention of the person who views the photo. i have been captured and am pleased with what i have seen.
Sep 7, 2012 08:00:04 #
lightchime wrote:
The early morning fog was so heavy, accurate focusing was nearly impossible. It is not that the water and sky could not be photographed - they were not visible in the cloud of moisture.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
Cool.............. :thumbup: :thumbup:
Sep 7, 2012 09:47:25 #
Very cool! I really like this.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
lightchime wrote:
The early morning fog was so heavy, accurate focusing was nearly impossible. It is not that the water and sky could not be photographed - they were not visible in the cloud of moisture.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
I think this looks more like an oriental painting.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Sep 7, 2012 09:58:04 #
Lucian
Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
The yellow colour in the trees in the background does not make sense. Between the yellow branches of the tees the light should also have been white, like the majority of your image in the left and upper left. It looks like you tinted it all yellow, then cut it out and left the pure white but failed to understand that the light between the trees and branches would also remain white if the sky area shown in the left and upper left was a white as you are showing it.
You can't have white sky in the background and then in between the trees and branches in the background, have yellow sky. Colours look fake or manipulated to me, but not consistently manipulated. I hope you understand what I mean by that.
You can't have white sky in the background and then in between the trees and branches in the background, have yellow sky. Colours look fake or manipulated to me, but not consistently manipulated. I hope you understand what I mean by that.
Sep 7, 2012 09:58:55 #
Everyone, thank you.
A friend and I traveled about an hour in hopes of capturing the morning light. I was so disappointed. I took many more images than usual because there was very little I could see and focusing had to be a guess.
If I hadn't been shooting RAW, I would have had nothing. As it is, there are a couple more images which will make their way here. One is absolutely surrealistic.
There is no ever exposure - there is only the white of the fog (and a bit of magenta from the morning light) with the background obliterated. If I remember, the original was very low key.
This seems to be the artist in me - but there is almost none. It was left brain processing with a right brain result.
A friend and I traveled about an hour in hopes of capturing the morning light. I was so disappointed. I took many more images than usual because there was very little I could see and focusing had to be a guess.
If I hadn't been shooting RAW, I would have had nothing. As it is, there are a couple more images which will make their way here. One is absolutely surrealistic.
There is no ever exposure - there is only the white of the fog (and a bit of magenta from the morning light) with the background obliterated. If I remember, the original was very low key.
This seems to be the artist in me - but there is almost none. It was left brain processing with a right brain result.
Sep 7, 2012 10:22:25 #
I like the outcome, especially considering the hard environment you described. Eager to see more from this posts from this trip!
Sep 7, 2012 11:04:39 #
Lucian
Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
Lightchime,
Can you explain why we see white sky in your image but the sky that is showing between the trees in the background is all yellow sky please? The sky should all be consistent in colour should it not?
Can you explain why we see white sky in your image but the sky that is showing between the trees in the background is all yellow sky please? The sky should all be consistent in colour should it not?
Sep 7, 2012 11:24:49 #
I've fished there lots of times, what part of Pittsburgh are you from? Like what you've done to the picture.
Sep 7, 2012 12:17:46 #
Lucian wrote:
Lightchime,
Can you explain why we see white sky in your image but the sky that is showing between the trees in the background is all yellow sky please? The sky should all be consistent in colour should it not?
Can you explain why we see white sky in your image but the sky that is showing between the trees in the background is all yellow sky please? The sky should all be consistent in colour should it not?
That is an easy one to answer. Western Pennsylvania is much less level than Ohio. Although the mountains are not big, they tend to be much more so than you have. What you see in the background is the peak of a low mountain and the foliage of the trees - multiple layers of foliage and branches that is at a distance from the cattails.
Although the orange is a bit enhanced, it is really there. It is due to the early morning light which tends to be warmer than midday. The magenta of the morning is evident if you look at the water/sky area. Except to remove some branches in the water, the basic structural composition was unmodified. There was a great deal of orange in the sand which was removed.
Thank you for asking. Often I am at a loss for answers - this time I think I am correct.
Sep 7, 2012 12:20:21 #
Sep 7, 2012 16:26:33 #
Lucian
Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
Regarding the question about the yellow sky between the trees and not being white like the rest, Lightchime wrote:
"That is an easy one to answer. Western Pennsylvania is much less level than Ohio. Although the mountains are not big, they tend to be much more so than you have. What you see in the background is the peak of a low mountain and the foliage of the trees - multiple layers of foliage and branches that is at a distance from the cattails.
Although the orange is a bit enhanced, it is really there. It is due to the early morning light which tends to be warmer than midday. The magenta of the morning is evident if you look at the water/sky area. Except to remove some branches in the water, the basic structural composition was unmodified. There was a great deal of orange in the sand which was removed."
I don't wish to seem disrespectful but I am from Wales and we have far higher mountains than anything in Pennsylvania. I also lived in Austria in the Alps for 11 years and in Vail Colorado for 5 years, so I am quite familiar with hills, mountains, fog and all other manner of weather conditions.
What you describe as the peak of a low mountain and trees in the background is actually not that. It is clear that these are simply trees, in your image, there is no sign of a hill even, let alone a mountain. Clearly the trees in the background are further away than the cat tails in the foreground, however, they are not that far away because you can clearly see the trunks, limbs and branches of the trees and determine roughly how far away they are.
The distance is not the point here. What I would like to know is why we see the white nothingness of what I shall assume is sky and some fog, that makes up almost half the image in a diagonal line, yet the trees in the distance on the right, that clearly have the sky visible through their limbs and branches is almost all yellow?
I fully understand morning glow of sun light through fog etc,. so I M NOT CONFUSED BY ANYTHING LIKE THAT. wHAT i DO SEE IN THE IMAGE IS HALF WHITE, THEN A LINE OF YELLOW/ORANGE AROUND THE EDGES OF THE TOPS OF THE TREES AS THEY GO FROM TOP RIGHT TO BOTTOM LEFT IN THE IMAGE, IN THE BACKGROUND, (ohhh darn, sorry about the caps lock getting stuck there) which is almost completely yellow/orange, despite the fact that we can clearly see the sky through those limbs and branches.
In reality that sky area should be the same density/colour as the majority of sky in the upper and left side of your image and possibly a gradation of that colour as it moved down the image, which of course was pure white. However what we see is a grouping of trees in the background that look like they were cut out of an orange/yellow scene and then had white pasted all around them. It is clear that the cat tails were part of this scene of course but the yellow colour looks fake or better said, was added after the fact but of course not too well because everything is yellow. You can't have yellow and white sky in the same image with a harsh line dividing them in the real world.
May we please see the original untouched or unaltered image to get an idea of what was going on here, atmospherically?
"That is an easy one to answer. Western Pennsylvania is much less level than Ohio. Although the mountains are not big, they tend to be much more so than you have. What you see in the background is the peak of a low mountain and the foliage of the trees - multiple layers of foliage and branches that is at a distance from the cattails.
Although the orange is a bit enhanced, it is really there. It is due to the early morning light which tends to be warmer than midday. The magenta of the morning is evident if you look at the water/sky area. Except to remove some branches in the water, the basic structural composition was unmodified. There was a great deal of orange in the sand which was removed."
I don't wish to seem disrespectful but I am from Wales and we have far higher mountains than anything in Pennsylvania. I also lived in Austria in the Alps for 11 years and in Vail Colorado for 5 years, so I am quite familiar with hills, mountains, fog and all other manner of weather conditions.
What you describe as the peak of a low mountain and trees in the background is actually not that. It is clear that these are simply trees, in your image, there is no sign of a hill even, let alone a mountain. Clearly the trees in the background are further away than the cat tails in the foreground, however, they are not that far away because you can clearly see the trunks, limbs and branches of the trees and determine roughly how far away they are.
The distance is not the point here. What I would like to know is why we see the white nothingness of what I shall assume is sky and some fog, that makes up almost half the image in a diagonal line, yet the trees in the distance on the right, that clearly have the sky visible through their limbs and branches is almost all yellow?
I fully understand morning glow of sun light through fog etc,. so I M NOT CONFUSED BY ANYTHING LIKE THAT. wHAT i DO SEE IN THE IMAGE IS HALF WHITE, THEN A LINE OF YELLOW/ORANGE AROUND THE EDGES OF THE TOPS OF THE TREES AS THEY GO FROM TOP RIGHT TO BOTTOM LEFT IN THE IMAGE, IN THE BACKGROUND, (ohhh darn, sorry about the caps lock getting stuck there) which is almost completely yellow/orange, despite the fact that we can clearly see the sky through those limbs and branches.
In reality that sky area should be the same density/colour as the majority of sky in the upper and left side of your image and possibly a gradation of that colour as it moved down the image, which of course was pure white. However what we see is a grouping of trees in the background that look like they were cut out of an orange/yellow scene and then had white pasted all around them. It is clear that the cat tails were part of this scene of course but the yellow colour looks fake or better said, was added after the fact but of course not too well because everything is yellow. You can't have yellow and white sky in the same image with a harsh line dividing them in the real world.
May we please see the original untouched or unaltered image to get an idea of what was going on here, atmospherically?
Sep 7, 2012 16:39:24 #
Sep 7, 2012 17:10:17 #
Lucian
Your comments are interesting, but you overestimate your opinion of your interpretation. Your comments are well taken, but your conclusions are wrong.
I don't post originals on the web -only low resolution images. If that is inappropriate for you, don't look at my images. Sometimes knowledge mingles with ignorance.
Please take your ego somewhere else - to me it is over exposed.
Your comments are interesting, but you overestimate your opinion of your interpretation. Your comments are well taken, but your conclusions are wrong.
I don't post originals on the web -only low resolution images. If that is inappropriate for you, don't look at my images. Sometimes knowledge mingles with ignorance.
Please take your ego somewhere else - to me it is over exposed.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.