Is this shot strong enough to be technically weak?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

RGS

RGS

Well-known member
Member's gallery
Is this shot strong enough to be technically weak? Is any shot strong enough to be technically weak?

Polychrome Pass in Denali NP, 2007. It was made on a borrowed Canon D60 (NOT the much later 60D!). It's one of my first digital efforts after many years of film. I was still treating the sensor like film. It's pretty heavily processed to mask technical flaws. I'm wondering when (if) artistic value overcomes technical weakness. I'm very interested in your responses.

CRW_8667-T.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
It's a pretty cool image, kind of painterly in the way you edited it. But if I got your question I'd say no. The lack of detail in such large areas of the shadows and some of the whites is a problem in my view. It might be fun to come at the raw file again in lightroom with masking to try to recover some detail.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I would ask what the image means to you. Does it tie to ceretain memories of a trip, time or place? Is there something else that makes it special to you? I like the colors and the gradation of light/shadow across he shot. More detail in darker areas could help through masking, as noted in previous comment. Also, you could add a painterly texture layer and print on canvas to see if that look works better. If the photo is special to you, there is a way to make if work. You do have a pretty good place to work from with this version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top