The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
Living on the Central Coast of California, visiting this year’s superbloom at the Carrizo Plain National Monument is a must! We were lucky to find clouds in the sky and a constantly changing cloud/sun combination over the landscape. The sight is breathtaking. I kept taking shots of the mountains and managed to get one of sunlight directly on the yellow-covered mountain.
Specific Feedback
I am new to landscape photography. My work is primarily flowers. I am interested in feedback about the composition. Does it need cropping? I am also interested in any suggestions about processing in LR or PS. I appreciate any and all comments!
Technical Details
Olympus OMD II, ISO 200, f/6.3, 1/400 sec. Sky was replaced with clouds from similar shot.
I can’t make any claims of being a landscape photographer but I am an experience viewer of landscape images. Does that count?
I love the yellow color in this!
Not downplaying the effectiveness of the color in your mage but It has to be much better (emotionally) to see this in person!
This has a nice layered look to me, the FG is one layer, the water is another, then the middle ground area, then the area with the smaller strip of water that adjoins the foot of the mountain is another, then there’s the mountain and finally, the sky. Those layers (to me) create depth and definition.
The angled waterline where it meets the FG land is very pleasing and essential for creating an imagined periphery outside of the frame (left and right).
Another way of saying it is this: If the water were parallel and level across the image, my mind would assume that it’s the same beyond the left and right sides of the frame. That’s kind of boring and even static.
But, as it is, I imagine that the left is gradually getting smaller out of frame, or it may open up to a larger area of water, it’s dynamic in my mind.
The right side is the opposite, my imagination creates a larger body of water to the right (out of frame) and is also dynamic in my mind. I hope I’m not the only one that can make sense out of that block of text
The darker line where the mountain meets the low land provides an effective separation and it creates a semi-defined point where the mountain begins to rise.
The FG has clarity and the clarity fades into the BG (in a linear way) which also creates depth in my opinion.
The only thing that I feel is a bit off is the amount of sky, the clouds at the top are awesome but they seem to dominate the scene to a small degree.
Have you tried cropping about half of the sky?
In my personal opinion, if the sky were cropped down to about half, the image would be more balanced front to back.
Another way of looking at it is that the sky would have about the same amount of visual weight as the FG land (which is where the term “Balanced” comes into play).
Anyway, this is a terrific landscape image and I can only imagine how exciting it was to see it and photograph it in person!
Well done!
Edit:
I also feel that just a touch more contrast would help to bring out that wonderful yellow color a bit more.
Hello Mervin, Thank you for your detailed comments. It is great to get your impressions as a viewer as well as a more technical look. I have cropped the sky and then necessarily the sides of the frame to stay in the the same aspect ratio. I think this change and more contrast gives more attention to the unusual color in the mountains. I do wonder if there is too much uninteresting “dead space” on the lake below the reflection. I do enjoy your humor and thoughtful ideas!
I really like the new cropped version, it feels like it has a more balanced visual weight!
The colors stand out a lot more and it gives me a better sense of what it must have been like to be there in person, of course nothing can give the me the full sense of being there in person, that requires real ambient sounds, scents and true visual periphery but this is as close as you can get IMHO.
I feel like the dead space you’re referring to has visual appeal and it’s part of the story, it belongs there as it is, and it seems to have a slight yellow cast to tie it in.
Very nicely done, I only wish that I could have experienced this myself
I have to say that I think your repost with the suggestions by @Merv nailed it, Ann Louise. The clouds were a nice bonus as was the reflection in the water along with the yellow bloom of flowers on the mountainside. This also has a nice sense of depth to it from FG to BG. Beautifully done!
@Merv@Ed_Lowe : Thank you both for all comments and particularly the depth in the photo. This was taken with my Olympus 12-100 (micro four-thirds) zoom lens. If I used my 40-150 lens, I wonder if I would have been able to get the foreground and the mountain in the same way . I just checked that the lens was set at 54mm for the photo. My 40-150 is new and I am still learning with it. Unfortunately, I did not have it with me that day (lesson learned). Any thoughts are appreciated!
The lens you used was more than fine for this shot IMHO.
I don’t feel that the new lens would have made much difference in this case and the reason is the atmosphere, it’s evident to me that there is a slight haze in the air that causes a nearly linear gradient front to back blurring effect (but very mildly soft).
BTW, the new lens you have might be sharper overall when compared to this lens so don’t discount it based on my write-up.
The physical sharpness and the contrast sharpness of the lens is good in my opinion because it shows sharpness all the way up to just the other side of the water, then the atmosphere starts becoming more noticeable, it’s linear all the way to the clouds, it’s not quite as noticeable in the sky because it’s a lighter color (I can still see haze in the sky though).
Keep in mind that the haze is all around you, it’s just not very noticeable near where you’re standing.
The most effective way to use a wide angle lens for landscapes is fortunately the most intuitive way and that is:
Use the sharpest aperture opening for that lens (many times it’s somewhere in the middle of the aperture opening range like f11 to f16 for example), then focus about 1/3 the way into the scene, that insures that the FG will be the sharpest while the rest will be in acceptable sharpness (that’s the term most folks use), and to be honest, I think it’s a more pleasing image of there’s a very mild softness at the farthest end of the scene.
This is called “Hyperfocal Distance” and many people are using it with landscape photography without even realizing it.
There are calculators for Hyperfocal Distance but I only use them when I want to include something in the scene that’s very close to my camera.
You can use the online calculator free at this link: DOF and Hyperfocal Distance Calculator
You know you’re in the Hyperfocal Distance range when the DOF is represented by the infinity symbol rather than a number.
Have a look at the interactive graphic below the resultant numbers for a visual representation of DOF, near limit and hyperfocal distance.
I have that webpage loaded in my cellphone browser so I can quickly check the distances and DOF when I’m out shooting (if I see that I need it).
I hope that helps and please feel free to ask for more clarification if you’d like
Thanks for all of this info! Hyperfocal Distance is something I need to understand better. I will study the information with the online calculator you have highlighted. As an aside, how do you load a webpage onto your cellphone? I have an iPhone 13.
I am glad for your comments about the lenses. I was trying to focus about 1/3 the way into the scene but I always cross my fingers about the result.
I decided to do an example setup sheet using your camera make and a closely related model that also has a micro 4/3 sensor. It’s important that you choose a model that has the same size sensor, that plays a role in DOF and Hyperfocal Distance. A full frame camera would show much different resulting values.
I hope this helps with understanding how to use Hyperfocal Distances. It can be very confusing if you get into all the technical stuff but the calculator makes all that stuff melt away. So, as long as you know how to use the calculator, the rest doesn’t matter.
Oh yeah, that site offers a HF distance chart as well but even that can get a bit confusing if you’re not used to it, I find it easier and more intuitive to just use the DOF calculator since it includes HF distances in the same calculator.
I use an Android so I looked it up on YouTube and it occurred to me that a home screen shortcut would be a much better way to quickly access a webpage, I found a YouTube video that shows how to do that on an iPhone so here is the link for that: How to Easily Add a Webpage Shortcut On the Home Screen
Fortunately, that method works very well for general landscape photography!
It really is a valid and practical method.
The calculator really only comes into serious play for including objects that are pretty close to the camera, and when you want to get the whole scene in one shot.
Hi Ann Louise,
I think your repost is great!! When I looked at the original, the first thing I wanted was a little more contrast. What you did with your repost was perfect, and I like the crop you did, too.
Mervin gave you great info about the hyperfocal distance. I try to be conscious of it ALL THE TIME, as I have a tendency to take these same kind of wide-open country images. I have done the calculations for hyperfocal distance sometimes, but usually I just estimate it!!!
[quote=“Mervin Rosenquist, post:10, topic:34740, username:Merv”]
…Fortunately, that method works very well for general landscape photography! It really is a valid and @Merv ,
First, thanks so much for finding out how to add a webpage to my phone’s browser. What a great tip!
At last, I have had the chance to study your Hyperfocal Distance info.
The Photo Pills app definition: “Hyperfocal distance is the closest distance at which a lens can be focused while keeping objects at infinity acceptably sharp. When the lens is focused at this distance, all objects at distances from half of the hyperfocal distance out to infinity will be acceptably sharp.”
Does this mean the sharpness will start half way from the camera to the focus point? This allows for gradual sharpness up to a subject (if there happens to be a subject at the focus point) and continuing to infinity?
When you say, “There are calculators for Hyperfocal Distance but I only use them when I want to include something in the scene that’s very close to my camera.” You mean you want the calculator to tell you where the focus point needs to be (distance from the camera) in order to have that something within the depth of field?
This is a great lesson as I start to take landscape photos. I appreciate your help very much.
Not exactly, but really close, nearly all lenses are sharpest at the focus point, then are very slightly softer in front and behind that point but it’s usually not very noticeable in general.
Keep in mind that sharpness depends on the lens quality and the sharpest aperture opening, many lenses are slightly soft at their maximum and minimum openings, the sharpest aperture opening is usually somewhere in between and some lens manufacturers list the sharpest aperture opening but they tend to bury that information somewhere in the fine print (if at all).
There are methods for testing sharpness yourself and there are a few good YouTube videos on how to do that if you want to test them.
Yes, that’s correct!
Although, when dealing with Hyperfocal Distance (HFD), DOF is usually not a consideration, they are somewhat different but I like to use the DOF calculator for HFDs just because it’s easier for me to read the Hyperfocal Near Limit Distance and the HFD at the same time.
While in the DOF calculator, I select my camera make and model, then I select the aperture opening I want to use, then determine the distance to the near object I want to include (distance from my camera), then adjust the focal length in the calculator until the distance I need shows up in the Hyperfocal Near Limit results, then look at the next row up to see what distance to place my focus point of the lens at (the HFD).
I have to make an apology here, I was mistaken about the best way to calculate the HFD earlier so please disregard that information. I probably just made it more confusing for you and I do sincerely apologize for that! Can I just call it a “Senior Moment?”
HFD is completely determined by the focal length and the aperture opening of your lens.
The following is the best way I know of to determine the HFD.
I’m sure I got it right this time! Arghh… So sorry about that!
Anyway:
Measure or estimate the distance from your camera to the object you want to include in the scene, this is the Hyperfocal Near Limit.
Then double that distance, this is the HFD.
You can use either the DOF calculator or the HFD table, it’s a simple matter of which one you prefer to use.
Note: Most people rarely consider using longer focal lengths because of the DOF limitations. As an example, a 150mm focal length at f11, the Hyperfocal Near Limit is 218 ft. with the HFD at 436 ft., the distances can get pretty large but there are some cases where the scene requires it.
This is the reason that most landscape photography is done with wide angle lenses.
In the examples below, I used your 12-100mm lens and I used the minimum focal length of that lens as the minimum distance to an object that you can include in your scene, (and based on an f11 aperture opening).
In the 12mm example below, you can include an object just a couple of feet away from your camera, maybe it’s a few wildflowers or some interesting rocks and you have the camera placed low to the ground.
Be careful when using the HFD table, it’s easy to look at f1.1 and think you’re looking at f11 since the decimal point is so small and the numbers are so close together, just make sure that it’s the right f number.
Again, I’m very sorry for not double checking the information I posted the other day, that was a complete oversight. I certainly didn’t mean to make things more confusing for you! It’s confusing enough as it is!
I will try to be more careful about double checking the information I post in the future.
I hope the above information makes more sense, you obviously have a good understanding of how it works already so hopefully this will clear up my previous misleading information.
