Sedona Arizona-and a question

Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
3,531
Location
Thornhill, Ontario, a suburb of Toronto
Last October, my wife and I flew to Phoenix Arizona to attend the wedding of a life-long (we met in first grade in 1953) friend's son, but first spent a few days in Sedona.
The day before we arrived there were severe rainstorms with serious flash-flooding and for our first two days there, the skies were cloudy and the temperature relatively cold.
One morning while on our way to the Grand canyon, when our tour stopped to pick up passengers, I had a few minutes to grab a photo of a nearby landscape scene shrouded in early morning fog and cloudy skies. As taken the scene has homes and various bits of civilization in the foreground which I feel detracts and so I produced a version with all traces of civilization removed, which I prefer. As I literally never do photography of this type, I wondered what the feeling is among those who do, of manipulation of this sort. I would never enter this in any nature-type competition as I understand the rules about manipulation are quite strict, but I wondered if this sort of thing is frowned upon. Your thoughts and comments would be appreciated.
For the sake of clarity, I am posting both shots.
Nikon D3
zoom-Nikkor 24-70 2.8 auto focus
exposure probably f8 @ 1/60th
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
15,524
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
Job well done! So well done, I wonder why you didn't take the little bit of extra time required to remove the foreground trees in the bottom right corner.

It's your photo, so it should be your rightful choice to make those changes or not. As for preference, I like the first one better because it shows the man-made objects in the context of nature.

If instead I felt the buildings detracted from the scene in your photo, I wouldn't hesitate to remove them. Indeed, I made a photo of a tree in South Africa and went to considerable effort to remove some small buildings and a fence line that detracted from the subject.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
3,531
Location
Thornhill, Ontario, a suburb of Toronto
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
Job well done! So well done, I wonder why you didn't take the little bit of extra time required to remove the foreground trees in the bottom right corner.

It's your photo, so it should be your rightful choice to make those changes or not. As for preference, I like the first one better because it shows the man-made objects in the context of nature.

If instead I felt the buildings detracted from the scene in your photo, I wouldn't hesitate to remove them. Indeed, I made a photo of a tree in South Africa and went to considerable effort to remove some small buildings and a fence line that detracted from the subject.
Mike,
Thanks for commenting.
I didn't remove the trees you referred to because I didn't notice them(!!!!!).Shame on me!
Robert
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
589
Location
MN, USA
There is a difference between making a visual record of someplace and a visual impression of someplace. I think both are valid. All photography is basically artificial manipulation. Both good images.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
589
Location
MN, USA
I wouldn't say that about forensic photography.
To be honest, I don't know a lot about forensic photography. My understanding is that it is intended to make visual record of the crime scene so that it accurately shows the position and character of the scene and related objects.

I would say that the artificial part is the reduction of a three dimensional space onto a two dimensional plane, that the color gamut and dynamic range are (still) not quite up to the full visual spectrum, and the lens choice may introduce perspective distortions. All I'm saying is that the photograph is not the thing itself, but an edited version of it.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Messages
3,077
Location
Kuşadası / Turkey
The second image is nice but kind of ordinary as it is possible to see images with such scenes often. The first image makes me think how lucky the people who live there as they wake up so close to mountains every day and feel / see them in different seasons under different weather conditions. So my vote goes to #1.
 
Joined
May 1, 2005
Messages
3,127
Location
Otaki Beach, New Zealand
Real Name
Philip Armitage
In terms of the photos, I prefer the first, but both are nice. Sedona is a lovely place, have been lucky enough to have been there twice and both times in winter so the temperatures was just as I like it - about 70F.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom