Great Bay Pack Ice

[w7xman]

Not from the top, but still a nice morning hike down at the seacoast today.

After yesterday's cold hike to the ravine, I needed something easier today, so I hiked around Adam's Point WMA, Great Bay, NH predawn. If you haven't been here, it's a neat walk, with pretty cool geology, and a ton of birds/wildlife.

I had come here to capture seasmoke, but it was just too windy! However, the wind was pushing around the pack ice that had formed, and at one point it was moving parallel to the shoreline. Set up for a long exposure.

I've cropped some uninteresting sky out of this, leaving it in a pano crop. Hoping the textures have enough to keep y'all intersted while viewing.

Thoughts and critiques appreciated!

Canon 20D w/ Sigma 18-200 @ 18mm
ISO 100
10 Seconds Exposure
Polarizer + 3 stop ND + 3 Stop GND Filters

 

[Brambor]

that's gorgeous

 

[dvbl]

First of all, fantastic shot.

A few techie questions to educate me and perhaps others...

1) In such a low light situation, why did you use a polarizer? Reduce glare on the water? Color saturation?

2) About your choice of the the 3-stop filters, did you meter on the brighter sky and then on the darker foreground, resulting in a 3 stop difference?

3) Any computer touch ups?

Thanks. Again, great photo.

 

[w7xman]

1) In such a low light situation, why did you use a polarizer? Reduce glare on the water? Color saturation?

I used for three benefits, to saturate colors, to cut glare, and to cut the light even further believe it or not...the polarizer added two stops, I would have only had a 2.5 seconds without it...not long enough to blur the ice...

2) About your choice of the the 3-stop filters, did you meter on the brighter sky and then on the darker foreground, resulting in a 3 stop difference?

It's just become something I can pretty much see, but yes, metering while learning is very important. If you don't have a meter...zoom in on the sky and the ground separately and do some math...

3) Any computer touch ups?

Cloned a few dust spots, a little saturation boost in the red channel, and the crop...I try to keep my stuff pretty natural...


Thanks for your comments, and am happy to answer techie stuff...

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Would I be a wet blanket if I said this wasn't my favorite shot? For my money, it does not appeal to me as much as some of your other shots. I wish to be able to tell you why... but so far today I haven't been able to decide why.

I guess the ice doesn't look natural to me -- it's neither ice nor water. It almost looks like clouds. That's the only reason I can come up with. And it fills most of the frame. FWIW, the previous ice flow one you posted did not appealed to me for the same reason, I think. Shots with blurred water (streams, falls) do appeal to me, but so far 0 for 2 on the blurred ice. I think if there were more sunrise and shoreline and less blurred ice, I would like it more.

Tim

 

[w7xman]

That's exactly the type of stuff that I want to hear. On a technical basis, and an "I was there level" I like the shot, but I'm curious if it speaks to others. Good to hear that it doesn't work for you, and why not!

Thanks..
w7x

Would I be a wet blanket if I said this wasn't my favorite shot? For my money, it does not appeal to me as much as some of your other shots. I wish to be able to tell you why... but so far today I haven't been able to decide why.

I guess the ice doesn't look natural to me -- it's neither ice nor water. It almost looks like clouds. That's the only reason I can come up with. And it fills most of the frame. FWIW, the previous ice flow one you posted did not appealed to me for the same reason, I think. Shots with blurred water (streams, falls) do appeal to me, but so far 0 for 2 on the blurred ice. I think if there were more sunrise and shoreline and less blurred ice, I would like it more.

Tim

 

[Mark Schaefer]

I like this photo. It captures a beautiful moment in time.

The picture is very surreal. It can be a matter of personal preference on how much to blur the motion. The more motion and longer streaks will increase the surrealism. The amount of blur here works for me. At first I did not recognize this as a moving ice sheet. I can also imagine a moving current, tide, or waves producing a similar image on water in another season. I don't think that detracts at all from the image. It is very attractive in any case.

This kind of reminds of a Rene Magritte or Maxfield Parrish painting. Both would have placed a model on or near the rock, or provided some other subject against this surreal background. That is not to say this photo does not work in its own right.

My eye tends to wander around the rock, into the blue streaks, into the reflected red light, to the right along the shore, back toward the red light, and perhaps out of the picture toward the sunrise source of the light. All of the elements are compelling, but perhaps none is a strong focal point. Perhaps the reflected red light on the ice holds my attention best.

All things considered I do like the photo.

 

[skiguy]

Very nice..where in PS are you boosting the Saturation in the Red Channel?

 

[w7xman]

Very nice..where in PS are you boosting the Saturation in the Red Channel?

Thanks,

This technique is quite simple. In the layers window, select "hue/saturation" When the window pops up, it's in the master saturation mode. In the box, there is a drop down menu with 6 color channels as well, that you can selectively adjust. In this case, if I did master saturation, the blue went electric and unnatural. Hope that helps...

~w7x

 

[darren]

Jim,

Nice shot. Great use of filters to get the effect that you desired. It is shots like this that demostate that photography can be an art form and not merely a documentary tool. The thought process before the shot is what determines the final outcome.

I too thought that it was moving water blur. It is interesting to find out that it was ice. Cool. I think the motion blur provides enough interest in what would otherwise be a big empty area.

Can you post the uncropped shot? I feel the sky might be cropped a little tight.

At the risk of being a wet blanket as well, I did have one other observation on this shot. I really like this shot but for some reason I find myself thinking "I like it a lot, but I would not hang it on my wall." I find that a lot with many of my own experimental shots. I love the effect, but the subject isn't strong enough for me to want to look at it for months. It could be a connection factor. If the shot looked exactly the same but it was of the harbor down the street from me then maybe I would have enough of a connection to it that I would love it and hang it on my wall. Since I do not have any connection to that area, the shot is great, but it holds no connection for me and it ends up not being strong enough to stand on it own. Does that make any sense? Could be an entire new thread...

- darren

ps: I would hang your avatar shot on my wall without hesitation. Of course I have a very strong connection with the subject, but I believe that shot would stand on it's own with other viewers.

 

[w7xman]

Jim,

Nice shot. Great use of filters to get the effect that you desired. It is shots like this that demostate that photography can be an art form and not merely a documentary tool. The thought process before the shot is what determines the final outcome.

I too thought that it was moving water blur. It is interesting to find out that it was ice. Cool. I think the motion blur provides enough interest in what would otherwise be a big empty area.

Can you post the uncropped shot? I feel the sky might be cropped a little tight.

At the risk of being a wet blanket as well, I did have one other observation on this shot. I really like this shot but for some reason I find myself thinking "I like it a lot, but I would not hang it on my wall." I find that a lot with many of my own experimental shots. I love the effect, but the subject isn't strong enough for me to want to look at it for months. It could be a connection factor. If the shot looked exactly the same but it was of the harbor down the street from me then maybe I would have enough of a connection to it that I would love it and hang it on my wall. Since I do not have any connection to that area, the shot is great, but it holds no connection for me and it ends up not being strong enough to stand on it own. Does that make any sense? Could be an entire new thread...

- darren

ps: I would hang your avatar shot on my wall without hesitation. Of course I have a very strong connection with the subject, but I believe that shot would stand on it's own with other viewers.

Thanks Darren,

I know what you mean about the connection to the subject, and that's one of my worries with my more abstract stuff like this. Neat but...

I'm away from my digital Negatives, but I can post it uncropped monday.

And lastly, for my avatar shot, perhaps we can trade prints, I have my eye on a few of yours...

 

[skiguy]

Thanks,

This technique is quite simple. In the layers window, select "hue/saturation" When the window pops up, it's in the master saturation mode. In the box, there is a drop down menu with 6 color channels as well, that you can selectively adjust. In this case, if I did master saturation, the blue went electric and unnatural. Hope that helps...

~w7x

Thanks for the tip. I have been adjusting Channels/Hue and Saturation through the Pull Down Tab(Image) at the top of the program window. Your method using Layers is much cleaner as you can toggle this Layer on and off. Doing it the way I have creates the same effect but locks the adjustment into the History Pane therefore resulting in only being able to turn off that effect and every other effect after. Obviously I need to work with Layers More. Thanks Again!