Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.
Decision, Take II
‹ PreviousLandscape GalleryNext ›

Decision, Take II

by Lon Overacker

Gallery: LandscapePosted January 3, 20188,561 views15 comments
Thank  you so much for your comments, suggestions and for indicating a preference on my previous post.  Rather than drag that one out and reposting, I decided to start over.  In fact I went back to the RAW file for both and started over.

I appreciate the honest comments and reactions.  I think the varied array of comments and preferences kinda indicate that either/both are not particularly strong images.  But something about the starkness of the bare tree against the varied background and other elements there's got to be some potential, I'm thinking.

I've incorporated some advice and suggestions.  Initially, the lean of the tree didn't bother me.  But combined with some comments about balance and empty spaces, I think the rotation and resulting crop improved the 2nd rendition, so I'm posting first this time. The crop also reduced the bare verticals in the LL, so I think that's an improvement.  And I think the pine greens in this version work well to balance the colors and space.

Also, I think it was Preston who mentioned brightening the bare tree itself.  In looking back at what I posted I was finding the previous image to be flat. One of the reasons I reprocessed.  In both versions here I boosted the bare tree to help separate from the bg a bit more.

Anyway, 'nough said.  Not asking for a preference this time, but am wondering if either or both of these images are an improvement of the first try.

Thanks!

Comments

15 comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on January 3, 2018 at 9:57 PM
Here's the other rework, with is the same image file as the original posted a couple days ago, here.

Thanks for any comments,

Lon
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Chambers on January 3, 2018 at 10:33 PM
This is far superior to your earlier post IMHO.  I still don't care for the short bare branches in the extreme left bottom, but the brightening of the tree really brings this image to another level.  Even then, however, this is not an image that really thrills me, which is sad because the bare tree itself, especially brightened, is a fantastic subject.
Registered on April 10, 2005, 753 Posts, 21216 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on January 3, 2018 at 11:19 PM
Thanks Bill for your honesty. 

Ya know, one of the reasons I continue posting and commenting here, is that we don't have to love every image that's posted, and certainly don't expect everyone to love what we post.  Honest opinions are all we're looking for.  

One thing is certain that I think we all can agree upon, is that the feedback is valuable and more often than not, we are improving our work when we consider that feedback.

Thanks!
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by scott lanz on January 4, 2018 at 10:19 AM
I also think "Take II" is a major improvement, Lon. I like the way the bare tree stands out, and I think straightening the tree is a big improvement as well. My only nit are the small, bare vertical trunks or branches in the far LLC, but this is minor. Overall, I like it.  I appreciate the rework and being able to see the changes. 
Registered on November 14, 2003, 840 Posts, 12902 Comments
Comment posted by Philip Hodgkins on January 4, 2018 at 1:53 PM
Lon, I think the rework is the best rendition. There is nothing else there that offends the eye (amazing what a difference straightening the tree made).

Nature seldom gives a perfect picture that fits in a square/rectangular format. My opinion  is formed around what commands or dominates the scene; and here, the tree certainly does. All the rest of the scene supports that subject. Any imperfections are just lumps in a beautiful and tasty gravy.laugh
Registered on July 24, 2006, 2741 Posts, 12349 Comments
Comment posted by Ed Lowe on January 4, 2018 at 1:57 PM
Even though I liked the prior post the brightening of the tree has elevated this another notch, Lon. I am still leaning; pun intended; toward the second version here. It just seems more natural and relaxed with the tree at a slight angle where as the other seems to rigid and structured. I hope that makes sense.

Ed
Registered on February 7, 2004, 414 Posts, 7115 Comments
Comment posted by Julia Flanagan on January 4, 2018 at 2:10 PM
Lon, I like this new version with the lightened bare tree.  Would you mind explaining your processing to "boost" the bare tree?  The lightening does not seem to have affected the remainder of the image, but I'm puzzled as to how you did this given the very fine branching of the bare tree.

Thanks,
Julie
Registered on November 13, 2003, 59 Posts, 986 Comments
Comment posted by Ed McGuirk on January 4, 2018 at 2:38 PM
Lon, I really like this version of the image a lot (much stronger than the earlier post). This is an amazing tree, and I like how you lightened it in the re-post, it really pops out from the background now. I also like the slight lean too, it makes the image more dynamic. I love having both the yellow and rust colored foliage, the dark rusty foliage (oaks?) in the background really makes the tree stand out. I also like how you chose to crop the branches on the right side of the tree and not show the entire tree. I think that crop places more emphasis on the interesting shaped branches on the left side of the tree. This is a very stark image, but has a lot of impact with me.
Registered on November 29, 2017, 19 Posts, 260 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on January 4, 2018 at 6:33 PM
Thanks for the comments folks! And for the validation of the rework.  As I've said, the feedback we get is so helpful in improving our work and images. So Thanks!

Any imperfections are just lumps in a beautiful and tasty gravy.laugh - Phil
 

Phil - LOL, one of the best photographic analogies I can remember! sad

 Would you mind explaining your processing to "boost" the bare tree?


Julia, thank you for your comments - and what a great question, thanks for asking! With out writing a novel, which I tend to do... I'll try and summarize a few things.  As we all know, there are countless ways on accomplishing things in Photoshop.  And my disclaimer? I have no idea if my methods are the best, most efficient or least destructive in PS. One thing I have learned though is that questions like this are what spur me to learn more about image processing.  Having said that, I was able to increase the luminosity of the tree in a number of ways. But first, you are correct that it would be quite impossible to select the tree itself with all the tiny branches and color/tone variations to make specific adjustments to the tree.  The MAIN key (at least for me) is to address adjustments to tones, color, luminosity, saturation, etc., rather than trying to select objects like a single tree. Keeping that in mind, here are a few things I did:
1. Starting in RAW, I used the Luminance in the HSL(Hue, Saturation, Luminance) adjustment.  Knowing that the tree contains more blue/cyan and very light tones compared to the rest of the image, I boosted the luminance values of blue and cyan.  Now these are global adjustments so the cyan was also picked up in the color/luminance of the pine trees. But that's ok.  I also made Clarity and Vibrance adjustments as I do with most images.
2. Once in PS a great way to adjust luminosity without affecting color is by using a B&W layer (or a Hue/Sat layer can be used too.) The key though is to use these adjustment layers with the Blending mode set to Luminosity.    Here I did the same thing as in RAW and increased the sliders for the blue and cyan adjustments.  This actually turns out to be a pretty good sample image for this technique. The reason I say this because the yellows are concentrated in the willow, the reds mostly in the rusty oak leaves (as well as in the willow) and the greens of the pine/cedar - although I've let them go fairly dark. So I could also tweak the yellows/reds/greens to go a little darker, which by default make the white-ish (with blues and cyans) appear lighter.  Hope that makes sense
3. The other round about way to make the tree stand out is to increase contrast - lights go lighter, darks, darker.  Any number of ways to do this. One tip I picked up somewhere was the use of LAB mode (instead of RGB.) Now this is a topic for an entire tutorial and there are lots of them out there. I'll link to one.  But I've been using a duplicated layer I process in LAB Color mode and add it to the layer stack using a variety of Blending modes and opacities. Mostly use Soft Light, Overlay, but also Normal works as does Color and Saturation blending modes.  Here's one tutorial. Or just google "using LAB Mode in Photoshop" and you'll get tons - some quite advanced and complex. The link above is one of the more simple ones.
4. Another way to increase contrast or give an image a little punch is using a Curves or Levels Adj layer.  The trick is to just add the Adjusment layer, but do not make any adjustments.  Simply change the blending mode to Soft Light and change opacity to taste. Real simple.  Got that one from Mr. Preston Birdwell!  Thanks buddy!  

Attaching a rough idea of what the layers look like.

Hope this helps. Feel free to contact me if you need more clarification.

Lon

thanks again everyone for your help!
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Chambers on January 4, 2018 at 6:58 PM
Lon, I keep coming back to this image because of the wonderful bare tree.  It's just too good to leave behind.  I would like to offer suggestions on how to make it more pleasing (to me), but I really don't have any.  I would like to play with it some - may I have your permission to capture a screen shot and play with it a little?  If you would prefer that I not, I certainly understand. If granted permission and I come up with anything I like I will email to you and not post it here.
Registered on April 10, 2005, 753 Posts, 21216 Comments
Comment posted by Harry Lichtman on January 4, 2018 at 8:18 PM
Processing of the tree looks great Lon.  I can remember an image of yours using similar trees, maybe a BE that I thought was much better from a compositional standpoint.  The stark tree within the context of the other trees still doesn't grab me. Maybe a tighter view of the tree and it's branches would be stronger for me. The brightening of the tree does make it stand out more and creates more dimension.
Registered on September 17, 2010, 304 Posts, 3507 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on January 4, 2018 at 9:04 PM
Bill - Absolutely and I appreciate you asking and offering to take a look and offer alternate suggestions.  I am more than happy to send a more appropriate RAW file if you want that.  But certainly you can start with the screen shot.  Drop me an email any time.

Harry - 

 I can remember an image of yours using similar trees, maybe a BE that I thought was much better from a compositional standpoint

Not sure if a typo, but I can't figure out what "BE" is?

Thanks all!
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by Preston Birdwell on January 5, 2018 at 7:34 PM
I like what you did with the light on the main tree, and on the rework in general, but I think the composition with the leaning tree has more emotional impact, and shows the forest as it truly is. 
--P
Registered on November 1, 2003, 471 Posts, 5188 Comments
Comment posted by Mark Seaver on January 6, 2018 at 3:11 PM
Lon, I like the increased contrast and the extra view of the bare tree in Take II.  Your processing has created a combination of starkness and mystery that make this easy to look at repeatedly.  To me, enjoying repeated views is what good photography is all about.  The bare verticals in the lower left are both somewhat distracting and interesting.  In the long run, I think they add to the atmosphere.
Registered on January 23, 2011, 1103 Posts, 17270 Comments
Comment posted by Harley Goldman on January 7, 2018 at 1:49 PM
Yep, this one works for me. Nice job on the repost. 
Registered on November 19, 2003, 586 Posts, 11271 Comments