[Photos-by-Chas]

Zapp, I did try B/W and sepia tone but I like the color version better.

[StiffLegged]

For those of you wishing to gain perspective on the size of Devil’s Tower, there are three adult humans in that photograph. Can you see them?

'Fraid not, Chas, haven't spotted anyone yet.

[normhead]

And all 14 of them are gorgeous, wow .

Well thanks then. I will say, that since I submitted to the PEG, I have better lenses and higher resolution cameras. It's not all on the PEG judges that I don't submit stuff. I suffer rejection badly.
None of those images was ever submitted to the PEG,

---------- Post added 06-23-20 at 04:11 PM ----------

'Fraid not, Chas, haven't spotted anyone yet.

They are down in the trees wearing Ghillies suits.

[BigMackCam]

For those of you wishing to gain perspective on the size of Devil’s Tower, there are three adult humans in that photograph. Can you see them?

Are they hang-gliding? I see three bird or glider shaped dots around the peak

[Photos-by-Chas]

Not in the trees, not hang-gliding. They are climbing the side. I've attached a cropped section of the previous photo to show their location.

Regarding all the comments that it looks flat, the 16X20 hanging on my wall almost looks 3D to me.

[StiffLegged]

No wonder they weren't spotted! Thanks for the enlarged detail, the true scale - not visible in your first post, alas - gives proper context. 'Tis ginormous!

[BigMackCam]

Not in the trees, not hang-gliding. They are climbing the side. I've attached a cropped section of the previous photo to show their location.

Regarding all the comments that it looks flat, the 16X20 hanging on my wall almost looks 3D to me.

Wow! That's some rock, no doubt about it...

[normhead]

Regarding all the comments that it looks flat, the 16X20 hanging on my wall almost looks 3D to me.

People were envisioning what could have been,

[bkpix]

My son and I stopped there last summer. I found it curiously difficult to photograph convincingly, especially in midday light.

[Rondec]

I think you did very well considering the circumstances, I would just say that I don't think it is the sort of photo that is likely to get into PEG. Those photos seem to be more heavily processed and have more "color" for lack of a better term.

I don't know that it is a standard to shoot for -- probably depends on what sort of photo you like, but if you had taken the image at sunrise and pushed it really hard it would be more like what the judges are looking for.

[Photos-by-Chas]

I appreciate all the comments and criticisms. All will have an influence on my future photography. Thank you.

[Ron Boggs]

Hardest part of landscape work--other than lighting--is the layers of interest. Unfortunately your foreground is "trees chopped in half" that serve as a fence to block the eye from moving into the image. I'm terrible at multi-plane landscapes that judges commonly look for, especially hard to get the various planes--foreground, mid-distance, background and infinity to tie together nicely with each other and with the subject. In addition, with well-known landscapes judges will be evaluating on uniqueness. How did you handle this subject in a manner that hasn't ever (or seldom) been seen before. Generally, the tourism overlooks and parking lots rule you out as "same old view."

To avoid such critical eyes, I've always avoided the contests and just tried to get editors to like (and buy) my images or galleries to hang and sell a few. It's much easier to get publication quality images sold than it is to get past the reviewers of such "judged" forums.

[Photos-by-Chas]

Hardest part of landscape work--other than lighting--is the layers of interest. Unfortunately your foreground is "trees chopped in half" that serve as a fence to block the eye from moving into the image. I'm terrible at multi-plane landscapes that judges commonly look for, especially hard to get the various planes--foreground, mid-distance, background and infinity to tie together nicely with each other and with the subject. In addition, with well-known landscapes judges will be evaluating on uniqueness. How did you handle this subject in a manner that hasn't ever (or seldom) been seen before. Generally, the tourism overlooks and parking lots rule you out as "same old view."

To avoid such critical eyes, I've always avoided the contests and just tried to get editors to like (and buy) my images or galleries to hang and sell a few. It's much easier to get publication quality images sold than it is to get past the reviewers of such "judged" forums.

Thank you for your suggestions and critique. Your comment about "trees chopped in half" makes sense to me. I have played with a few other photos taken that day and see where maybe I could have used a different view to include more complete trees and give better size perspective. I've attached two of them. The climbers to which I referred in an earlier post are visible in both the added photos. They also give relative size comparison to the mountain.

Again, thank you for viewing and commenting.

[stevebrot]

My impression at the beginning of this thread was that it is a tough subject. The second thought was that it was taken from the the parking lot. The third thought was that other options for framing and perspective were probably limited, though some might be had some miles distant from the base. Below is a link to a Flickr search on the term "Devils Tower"...

Search: devils tower | Flickr

Despite being fascinated by the monolith since my boyhood, I have never been there and was surprised by the photos returned by the search. Chance favors the prepared and part of preparation may well have included several days or weeks of working with the subject in different light and moods. Even then, I suspect that short of arranging for an alien spacecraft, ala First Encounters of the Third Kind, I would likely have been skunked by Devils Tower.


Steve

[K2 to K50]

Not in the trees, not hang-gliding. They are climbing the side. I've attached a cropped section of the previous photo to show their location.

Regarding all the comments that it looks flat, the 16X20 hanging on my wall almost looks 3D to me.

After viewing the pic and reading the various comments up to just before this post of yours, I was about to post a suggestion - then I read this comment and said to myself - yes. My comment (not relevant to PEG submission, but relevant, I think, to general forum submission) is this: some scenic and and landscape shots are better appreciated when viewed on a larger scale than what can be accommodated here. I have viewed many photos posted in this forum and my reaction was "....OK". But when such posts offered a link to a more hi-res version of the image, and offer some enlargement opportunity, then my re-action went from "....OK" to "YES!" or even "WOW".

I think your comments I have high-lighted in red might underline this point. In other words, to give us "ordinary folk" (as opposed to PEG judges) a better chance to appreciate this kind of image, a link to a Flickr or other "cloud" site containing the original image would do wonders. (Or maybe I just lack imagination???)

I do agree with others' comments re the lighting being a little "flat" due to the time of day - at least, based on the low-sample jpeg posted here.