# Late Afternoon



## Tim Tucker (Feb 27, 2016)

One from late November, just got around to finishing it.

View attachment 117946


----------



## LarryLomona (Feb 27, 2016)

Excellent !


----------



## WesternGuy (Feb 28, 2016)

Tim this is an interesting image.  I'm not quite sure how I feel about it and I don't know why I feel that way.  Maybe if there was a bit more detail in the sky?  Don't know.

WesternGuy


----------



## Didereaux (Feb 28, 2016)

Tim,  Now get out your trusty ephemeris (photographer's emphemeris) and find when the moon will rise directly above the intersection of those two ridges.  OR   move your framing slightly right and find when the moon rises about center of that closest hill.   In otherwords Ansel that sucker!


----------



## thereyougo! (Feb 28, 2016)

Didereaux said:


> Tim,  Now get out your trusty ephemeris (photographer's emphemeris) and find when the moon will rise directly above the intersection of those two ridges.  OR   move your framing slightly right and find when the moon rises about center of that closest hill.   In otherwords Ansel that sucker!



You also need the Scottish weather to co-operate. The ephemeris is predictable, the weather not so likely to be clear.


----------



## Tim Tucker (Feb 28, 2016)

WesternGuy said:


> Tim this is an interesting image.  I'm not quite sure how I feel about it and I don't know why I feel that way.  Maybe if there was a bit more detail in the sky?  Don't know.
> 
> WesternGuy



The truth is that I struggle in this kind of light. When it looks good to me there's invariably to much separation in luminance between the sky/sunlit mountains and the foreground simply because the sun's sunk too low to light it well enough. This frame was shot at 1/30sec f5.6 which is 1-2 stops over-exposed for the moon (according to my little black book) just to get some detail in the foreground. I find you should really shoot earlier when the light is more balanced, but it doesn't look as good then.  Besides I had to leg it past a grove of trees to get a clear view and grab this shot before it disappeared.  Here's another take:

_EDIT: Shot re-edited (again) and posted above._



Didereaux said:


> Tim,  Now get out your trusty ephemeris (photographer's emphemeris) and find when the moon will rise directly above the intersection of those two ridges.  OR   move your framing slightly right and find when the moon rises about center of that closest hill.   In otherwords Ansel that sucker!



Ah, but the problem I find is that you can spend a lot of time waiting for everything to be in exactly the place you want it, but when you 'nail that sucker' it often falls flat of your expectation (it does with me).  It never quite turns out to be the world beater I thought it would. Besides Edward Weston never wasted too much time on one shot, he was always looking around the corner.



thereyougo! said:


> You also need the Scottish weather to co-operate. The ephemeris is predictable, the weather not so likely to be clear.



The weather also has the biggest effect on the quality of light, I'll take my chances with the moon.


----------



## Didereaux (Feb 28, 2016)

Tim Tucker said:


> Didereaux said:
> 
> 
> > Tim,  Now get out your trusty ephemeris (photographer's emphemeris) and find when the moon will rise directly above the intersection of those two ridges.  OR   move your framing slightly right and find when the moon rises about center of that closest hill.   In otherwords Ansel that sucker!
> ...




Ahhh, but quick-shooter Weston was not famous for his landscapes....whereas old methodical Adams was only famoous for his landscapes.  There's always a reason for the method the masters use on a given subject.   


...and btw I like the shot. it simply is one of those that begs to be perfected!


----------



## Designer (Feb 28, 2016)

These look as if created using pastels.


----------



## WesternGuy (Feb 29, 2016)

Tim, I know what you mean by struggling with the light.  I am not sure how you feel about multiple exposures, but maybe one for the foreground and one for the hills and sky, and then blend them together in PS.  After all, you are dealing with a fairly extensive dynamic range here.

I don't know if this would work, but I often shoot 3 to 5 exposure HDR images for situations like this and then play around with the different "exposures" a bit until I get something I am happy with.  Each to his own though.

So is that new snow on the hills, or just the last of the winter snow? 

WesternGuy


----------



## weepete (Feb 29, 2016)

Very nice indeed Tim!


----------



## Kalyt (Feb 29, 2016)

Nice! The mood is great, I think the soft colors sets the mood. I get the feeling of a summer evening just before the day turns into night. But I like the second picture the most, because of the darker shadows.


----------



## Tim Tucker (Feb 29, 2016)

Didereaux said:


> Ahhh, but quick-shooter Weston was not famous for his landscapes....whereas old methodical Adams was only famoous for his landscapes.  There's always a reason for the method the masters use on a given subject.
> 
> 
> ...and btw I like the shot. it simply is one of those that begs to be perfected!



Ahhh, but I'm not famous for my landscapes either.  (All my shots beg to be perfected, so much so that now there's a steady whine coming from the computer. )



Designer said:


> These look as if created using pastels.



I'm not sure all photographers can tell the difference between bright colour and saturated colour. I've seen a photo on here where the photographer boldly proclaimed the colour to be accurate when asked, (not by me), but I've never seen a blue sky or green leaf who's colour exists of one single solitary saturated wavelength before (blue sky is normally a mix of many wavelengths of light, the shorter wavelengths are just more dominant). I would like photographers to have more confidence in colour, instead of removing pastels via over-saturation and contrasting against black (complete lack of colour), remove over-saturation and contrast against colour, see what happens. I probably overdo it a little sometimes, it's kind of a reaction to all the saturated colour, my save the pastels campaign, lest they all disappear...  



WesternGuy said:


> Tim, I know what you mean by struggling with the light.  I am not sure how you feel about multiple exposures, but maybe one for the foreground and one for the hills and sky, and then blend them together in PS.  After all, you are dealing with a fairly extensive dynamic range here.
> 
> I don't know if this would work, but I often shoot 3 to 5 exposure HDR images for situations like this and then play around with the different "exposures" a bit until I get something I am happy with.  Each to his own though.
> 
> ...



I often do that, though I blend as I hate HDR, it's the best way to preserve the colours. I've got camera exposure and -2, -3. The image is just the -2. What I tried hard to preserve is the lightening of tone with distance, I've tried not to introduce too many darker tones to the distant hills and sky which restricts the contrast ranges of the various parts.

First snow, it was late November, same trip as a couple of other images I posted.



weepete said:


> Very nice indeed Tim!



Thank you. 



Kalyt said:


> Nice! The mood is great, I think the soft colors sets the mood. I get the feeling of a summer evening just before the day turns into night. But I like the second picture the most, because of the darker shadows.



I agree, so I re-edited and re-posted the image. I like soft colours.  Exactly the time of day it was shot, just as the sun dropped below the horizon. Time of year was late November, though round here if the sun comes out it's defined as summer.


----------



## Didereaux (Feb 29, 2016)

Generally landscapes are best printed on matte, or better still canvas.  This one however would be extraordinary done on a metallic finish, or metal...at say 20x30 at the very least 16x20.


----------



## Designer (Feb 29, 2016)

Nominated for POTM, February, 2016


----------



## WesternGuy (Mar 1, 2016)

..."hate HDR"... now there is a subject for a long conversation over a wee dram of single malt liquor.  Pretty strong sentiment, but sometimes I am not sure that simply blending two images will get you the dynamic range you are looking for.  Anyway, as I said, another completely separate thread. 

WesternGuy


----------



## Tim Tucker (Mar 1, 2016)

WesternGuy said:


> ..."hate HDR"... now there is a subject for a long conversation over a wee dram of single malt liquor.  Pretty strong sentiment, but sometimes I am not sure that simply blending two images will get you the dynamic range you are looking for.  Anyway, as I said, another completely separate thread.
> 
> WesternGuy



Don't mis-understand me, some of that statement is linked to my inability to get the results I want from it. It's a purely personal grudge with my HDR.


----------

