Lately I have been visiting Ireland quite a lot - I love the quiet and tranquil landscape vistas. Weather is always a problem (Pentax may be weather resistant but I'm not), nevertheless light can be amazing before and after the rain.

Those pictures were shot handheld with the Pentax K-1 and the DFA 24-70mm, somewhere along the Castlebar river on the trail from Castlebar to the National Museum of Ireland Country Life.

[Sailor]

Wow - these look absolutely magical! Beautifully done.

Jer

[french]

very good

[SSGGeezer]

Lovely images! Golden hour indeed.

[joip]

Beautiful lighting.

[Photobill]

Well done bravo!!!

[Hattifnatt]

Wow - these look absolutely magical! Beautifully done. Jer

very good

Lovely images! Golden hour indeed.

Beautiful lighting.

Well done bravo!!!

Thank you everybody!

[clackers]

. The virtue of journalism is the absence of artifice ... They should fabricate a reality.

Contradiction right there in your belief system, Oculus!

I love these images - great picture taking, great PP!

[oculus]

Contradiction right there in your belief system, Oculus!

I suspect that you did not understand what I wrote.

Brilliant quote from Lebowski.

[Fries]

Well this series showcases a distinctive style of post processing and good photography. And it works very well for me.

[Outlander]

would love to go to Ireland ! Beautiful Photo's TFS

[Hattifnatt]

Beautiful country. The post processing I think is a little heavy-handed. There is an increasing sense that one may simply frame a shot and shoot a scene and worry about shadow and highlight recovery later. The aesthetic of these images recalls paintings. I wonder whether the real craft of photography lies in capturing a scene as it really looks and looked at that particular fraction of a second. As I view these images of beautiful land at a beautiful time of day I find myself wondering what the landscape's actual impression on the mind really was because, to be sure, it was not this. Please understand no ill-wll is intended in my words. I simply mean that these are not good photographs for the reason that they do not evoke any sense of light as it presented itself then and there. I should also say I do not advocate photography absent of artifice. The entire photographic pursuit is to some degree artifice. A finely worked landscape photograph may not be "representative" of a scene. Think of black and white landscapes. They are not representative in a most sincere way, which is their lack of color. Photography is a fiction, but good photography is a finely crafted fiction striking the seer as true. If the work of the photographer were merely an act of transmission of the visual data of a point in time then journalists would count as artists; but journalists are not artists. The virtue of journalism is the absence of artifice. Our photographs should give the appearance of truth. They should make sense to the mind. They should fabricate a reality. In photography this is first and foremost a true representation of light.

I don't mind any kind of criticism, however I'm not quite sure I understand what you want to say, so I'll just tell you my story. Usually, my goal is to reproduce a landscape as close as possible to the way I have perceived it when I took the photo, with just a little bit of "painting" flavor. In other words, when post-processing I aim for a natural look with just a very small touch of surreal. It is of course impossible to reproduce 100% of what I see because eye and camera work in different ways. Sometimes I overdo it, most often by boosting the shadows too much, or darkening the sky too much, or both. Even when I'm not overdoing it (by my standards), some people will like the result, some won't, that's inevitable. In this particular case I was happy with how the final pictures turned out, I would say the light in the pictures is very close to what I saw when I took them. As it often happens in Ireland, light can be quite amazing between two showers of rain and I tried to capture it as best as I could. I'm sorry if it doesn't work for you. I truly appreciate your feedback, but I'm very well-aware that photography is subjective and it's impossible to please everybody, which is not my aim anyway.

I love these images - great picture taking, great PP!

Well this series showcases a distinctive style of post processing and good photography. And it works very well for me.

would love to go to Ireland ! Beautiful Photo's TFS

Thank you all, glad you like it!

[LeDave]

Beautiful series, I really love #3 the best, it reminds me of Middle Earth

[PenPusher]

Lately I have been visiting Ireland quite a lot - I love the quiet and tranquil landscape vistas. Weather is always a problem (Pentax may be weather resistant but I'm not), nevertheless light can be amazing before and after the rain.

Those pictures were shot handheld with the Pentax K-1 and the DFA 24-70mm, somewhere along the Castlebar river on the trail from Castlebar to the National Museum of Ireland Country Life.

A very nice set, I haven't been up that way in a long time, reminds me of walking down by the banks of the Maine River near Castlemaine (where Austrailia's Wild Colonial boy and my late very much loved Mother in Law originated).

Oculus would need to visit this part of the world to know that the lighting can be very surprising and you really don't need to do much pp.

I note from your profile that you are a Geophysicist may I suggest that you look up the works of George Victor Du Noyer 1817 - 1869, although an artist he worked for the Geographical Survey of Ireland, his sketches of the Geography of the time are really beautiful, there was an exhibition of his work in the National Gallery of Ireland back in 1995 and you could probably still find some of his works there, a paperback catalogue was published at the time and you never know the odd copy might still be available.

---------- Post added 03-23-2018 at 11:37 AM ----------

Beautiful country. As I view these images of beautiful land at a beautiful time of day I find myself wondering what the landscape's actual impression on the mind really was because, to be sure, it was not this.

I simply mean that these are not good photographs for the reason that they do not evoke any sense of light as it presented itself then and there.

I should also say I do not advocate photography absent of artifice. The entire photographic pursuit is to some degree artifice. A finely worked landscape photograph may not be "representative" of a scene. Think of black and white landscapes. They are not representative in a most sincere way, which is their lack of color. Photography is a fiction, but good photography is a finely crafted fiction striking the seer as true. If the work of the photographer were merely an act of transmission of the visual data of a point in time then journalists would count as artists; but journalists are not artists. The virtue of journalism is the absence of artifice. Our photographs should give the appearance of truth. They should make sense to the mind. They should fabricate a reality. In photography this is first and foremost a true representation of light.

Well judging by the time of year the the shots were taken the minds impression was probably that your boots were not as good as you thought they were and that the damp cold of the Irish winter was eating into your bones like nothing else can.

Our light is quite different to any place else, possibly due to being on the edge of the Atlantic.

I might be reading it wrong but I think your second paragraph is going round in ever decreasing circles.

[clackers]

Moved by seeing your work I was making an informal attempt to articulate for you, myself, and others this simple point: manipulations in images are as old as the craft of photography; but the art in manipulation (e.g. post processing) is creating an aesthetic that is convincing, to represent light as it might be. For me, the post processing in this series is not convincing because light simply doesn't look like that. That is all. I'm glad you are not opposed to criticisms. If the only purpose of sharing pictures is to receive adulation then the entire endeavor is vain and we remain forever mired in mediocrity. I like to post in this forum because I've received very helpful criticism here, and because written responses are the modus operandi (not little blue thumbs of empty approbation).

This is a post your photo thread, where I reckon the tone should be very supportive ... there is a Photo Critique thread I would have thought, for less constructive opinions.

As for your philosophy, I see nothing accurate about this pic with blown highlights, for instance ... we simply do not see in Black and White. It's artifice, of course:

Outlaw - PentaxForums.com