[BarneyL]

I'm struggling with my first attempts at winter landscapes. Getting exposure right in very high contrast scenes, and white balance... also, composition could definitely be better, there's a bit too much clutter in the scene, but you know, hindsight is 20/20... any thoughts?

[J.R.]

There might be some options if you vary the crop, maybe. The serenity of the scene is certainly striking Lines of direction in the photo are sometimes judged better (by the photographer) if a print is held upside down, thus helping the eye to follow without conscious analysis of the subject matter. Years ago, when using film, the saying was "expose for shadows and print for highlights." High contrast scenes call for lower contrast film, or in this case, perhaps some change of the settings. I have found some information on pages 56-57 of the K3II owner's manual that seems to address this issue, at least in part.

[CreationBear]

That's a lovely scene! In terms of composition, one thing that is happening for me is that with the bright mountain in the background at the top of the frame and the bright reflection at the bottom, my eyes flicker back and forth between the bright areas instead of being "guided" through the scene. Try cropping, say, the lower third of the picture: you lose the interesting reflection of course, but to me the resulting square crop is much more harmonious, since our eyes naturally "want" to travel over the dark water and out of the frame. The current lack of harmony might also be exacerbated by the portrait orientation--it's possible that the same scene laid out more horizontally would be easier for my eye to "read."


As for post-processing, I'm not finding the white balance a problem in what is a naturally "cool" scene, but a high contrast scene like this one usually really benefits from bracketing and exposure blending. If you've not already, you might explore the technique of using "luminosity masks" to fine tune the bright and dark areas of the frame.

[J.R.]

With your permission, I can demonstrate a way to preserve most of the elements without doing too much violence to the original.

[BarneyL]

Years ago, when using film, the saying was "expose for shadows and print for highlights." High contrast scenes call for lower contrast film, or in this case, perhaps some change of the settings. I have found some information on pages 56-57 of the K3II owner's manual that seems to address this issue, at least in part.

What I usually do, is get the spot reading from the highlights, then manually set exposure around +2 stops from that reading to get some shadow detail without (hopefully) overblowing the highlights. I think this is called ETTR (expose to the right). I've been trying this only recently, as I used to shoot AV or TAV exposure modes before. It certainly gave me better results, and gave enough dynamic range to pull the shadows a bit in post without introducing much noise, but in the end, it is not as easy as I thought to combat high contrast scenes. I wonder if graduated filter would help...? (I used a polarizer here)

a high contrast scene like this one usually really benefits from bracketing and exposure blending. If you've not already, you might explore the technique of using "luminosity masks" to fine tune the bright and dark areas of the frame.

I guess that's probably the way to go, although Ansel Adams didn't use exposure bracketing and blending to get stunning, well exposed shots :P.

In terms of composition, one thing that is happening for me is that with the bright mountain in the background at the top of the frame and the bright reflection at the bottom, my eyes flicker back and forth between the bright areas instead of being "guided" through the scene. Try cropping, say, the lower third of the picture: you lose the interesting reflection of course, but to me the resulting square crop is much more harmonious, since our eyes naturally "want" to travel over the dark water and out of the frame.

I understand what you mean, although I'd prefer not to lose the reflection, as I like the effect. Maybe the "flickering' wouldn't be an issue if the reflection were more faint, and the mountain brighter, punchier.

With your permission, I can demonstrate a way to preserve most of the elements without doing too much violence to the original.

Sure! Would you like the RAW file?

[Na Horuk]

I think its really nice. The only thing I would recommend is using long shutter to blur the water. That would remove some of the "clutter" and make the reflection even more outstanding. You did well with exposure and PP. Bright, snowy days are really difficult

[J.R.]

Actually, I'm not sophisticated enough to deal with the RAW file. For explanation on what I did, I simply copied the pic and manipulated it with Windows Office Picture Manager. Adjusted the crop, then decreased the brightness and then brightened mid-tones only, added color saturation, added contrast. I believe you have more to work with in the original, but I hope that this shows that there is a lot to work with in a digital photo.

Attached Images

 

[Kerrowdown]

any thoughts?

Me... I'd just adjust the white balance to remove the predominate blue cast and I'd tone down dramatically the yellow/orange sun area and turn it back into almost a monochromatic winter wonderland scene.

But hey each to their own, that's the beauty of photography, we all see scenes differently.

[CreationBear]

although Ansel Adams didn't use exposure bracketing and blending to get stunning, well exposed shots :P.

Ha, but he had chemistry on his side to sift the tonal range of his media...not terribly different than what we're doing with pixels these days. At any rate, Kerrowdown's edit seems to "flicker" a lot less for me as it tones down color and/or contrast between the sunlit mountain and its reflection...it would be interesting to know, however, if a similar scene in landscape orientation could get away with a bit more contrast since we seem to be wired to shift our eyes laterally rather than vertically.

[J.R.]

Ansel Adams used a zone system for calculating the brightness range of scenes. I believe that over simplifies it, but that can be found. For Adams, there was plenty of work getting the exposures, but there was real work in the darkroom, too. In B&W, there is no such thing as a straight print, unless, of course, you have a print that needs some work. I like Kerrowdown's rendering, but I think the reflection in the water loses too much and is a slight distraction. There seems to be some tension between choices, whether to try to improve what the scene is or whether to try to make it into a different scene, perhaps by using part of the scene only. Maybe there's enough here to stimulate our friend toward greatness.

[BarneyL]

Thank you all for the advice and your own sample interpretations of the photo. It's really helpful and gives new perspectives to gain from. Cheers!

[dlneubec]

That's a beautiful scene! Here is my take, trying to keep in the spirit of the original:
Darkened the fore and middle ground, especially the reflection area, so it would compete less with the mountain focal point
Increased contrast a bit
Decreased haze a bit
A little saturation increase

[compasiune11]

black and white version look great!

[Kerrowdown]

black and white version look great!

Thank you, I believe you maybe talking about my version in post 8.

It's still a colour image but as I said "I'd just adjust the white balance to remove the predominate blue cast and I'd tone down dramatically the yellow/orange sun area and turn it back into almost a monochromatic winter wonderland scene"

[Dean2]

To be honest, of all the versions and changes, I like the original the best of all. I think the op did a great job on the White Balance and I think the colour saturation and cropping create a very interesting landscape that looks just like mid day, mid afternoon sun on the mountain top and being reflected into the darker fore ground. Post 12's version is the closest to the original, but that version looks more like sun setting.