ChrisB wrote:
> I like the tight composition, Ken, and the mountains in the background seem
> to closer than they must be. But did you need to HDR it? I bet you could
> have captured that luminosity (nice) with a little tweaking of one
> well-exposed shot.
Thank you, Chris.
Consider that the picture was taken with the 21/3.5 and this is a
full-frame 6D, yes the mountains are closer than they appear. Unless
you have some altitude, it's getting a bit tight in there to turn an
airplane around. A lot of people fly up through here, but they have to
choose their return points carefully and it's very dependent on wind
direction. You don't fly this valley if the wind is from the north or
south as you will get pounded by the up and downdrafts. (most pilots
avoid the valley if there is any wind as you can't fly on the
starboard side of the valley if the wind is from the right so it puts
inbound and outbound traffic on the same side of the valley). There is
just one turn around place after this spot. It's not quite as tight as
Yosemite Valley, but not by too much. Vertical relief is similar to
Yosemite, just without the cliffs. You really need to be at a minimum
of 4000 MSL otherwise you might need a surgical procedure to extract
the flightsuit from your sphincter. 5000 MSL is much safer and gives
you a bit more margin if you get dumped by a downdraft.
If you go to www.skyvector.com and type in PABR (and press the GO
button), make sure you have the "World VFR" map selected. Just to the
east of PABR, you'll see a rectangle map tag for "ANCHORAGE RCO,
KENAI". Next to that you'll see a dot and the word "Settlement". This
photo was taken from right near the "S" in Settlement to the
south-east. Once you located it, switch the map over to "Anchorage
TAC" for maximum detail. In that view, the photo location is about
where the "G" is in "Eagle"
As to the HDR vs. no HDR...
Obviously, I was able to actually nail one of the exposures in my HDR
stack. Well, something like that. In reality, the ideal exposure is
always the one BETWEEN your shots. Anyway, I took one that was the
most ideal and processed it to the same effective result. The
highlights picked up a color cast from the highlight recovery (that
last recovered stop is never color coherent) and the shadows got
really nasty. When you recover the shadows, two things happen--one is
that you lose resolution/detail, and the other is a heavy skewage
(skewing and sewage) in colors. If I didn't have a stack, I would have
made it work--as I generally do. But this stack actually worked for a
change. And I've got huge flexibility in tone and color adjustment.
But it does require a tripod and remote.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|