Challenge: River and Tree: Optimize This!

Hi,

I'd like to submit the following image as an 'Optimize This!' challenge. My own interpretation can be found in the Landscapes forum, and am interested to see what other people make from it.

No real preference, would love to see some B&W interpretations as well as color, also maybe some conversions that concentrate on the sky and use the landscape almost in silhouette. Anything really!

Although the sky looks bright the highlights aren't clipped, so there should be plenty of data to work with.

Please include a '© Andrew Stannard' with images, together with the steps performed. Would suggest a maximum post size of 600px across?


Thanks, Andy.

Here is my Color version of your photo Andy.




Photo © Andrew Stannard




I processed this in LightRoom by adjusting all the colors for hue, saturation and luminance to my liking.
I hope you like as well.

I am working on a B/W version too I'll post that later....


Enjoy,
Brian

Andy,

I should have an advantage here as I was born and raised in East Anglia. In fact I'm off there tomorrow to visit an elderly aunt and meet up with friends and relatives, which means I shan't have a chance to have a go at your image (hurray! you all say).

The opening line of my school song was "Land of great skies and measureless horizons". I would crop out the bottom part, leaving just the tree, and concentrate on the sky and clouds.

Regards,

Stuart

Andrew Stannard said:

Hi,

I'd like to submit the following image as an 'Optimize This!' challenge. My own interpretation can be found in the Landscapes forum, and am interested to see what other people make from it.

Click to expand...

Andy, I decided to have a try, using LightZone. I wanted to take Stuart Rae's hint about the wide sky, since he won't be working on the image, at least for the weekend.

No real preference, would love to see some B&W interpretations as well as color, also maybe some conversions that concentrate on the sky and use the landscape almost in silhouette. Anything really!

Click to expand...

I tried to keep the colors as near to your image as possible, but I warmed them up slightly to have the tree's outlines emphasize the sky and keep a sense of three dimensions to the scene.



Here's what I did in LightZone:

First, cropped the image. Then,

1) Adjusted the white balance to
1a) Temperature 40.18 (to warm up the tree)
1b) Tint 2.0 (to bring out the faint haze of the clouds)
1c) Blend: Normal

2) Adjusted the color balance to
2a) Cyan-Red 0.8
2b) Magenta-Green 0.8
2c) Yellow-Blue 0.0
2d) Midpoint 1.13
2e) Blend: Normal

3) Downsized the image to 451 x 671 pixels. Transferred it to Irfanview to do this, since I haven't learned how to set pixel dimensions in LightZone yet.

4) Sharpened to 113 from 1.00. Kept the radius at 1.0 for this. Back to LightZone to do this, where there is numerical control of the sharpening amount, using a slider.

5) Overlaid a copyright notice. Moved once more to Irfanview to do that, also.

Thank you for letting me work on your picture, Andy.

I grew up in South Texas, where the prairie sky is also wide and high. And pale blue, most of the time.

Mary

Thanks for the versions so far, a few comments....

adjusting all the colors for hue, saturation and luminance

Click to expand...

When you were doing this, did you essentially leave all the other of lightrooms control in the neutral position, and just use the individual color sliders? I too have got the lightroom beta, but haven't used the individual color controls very much. Will have to have more of an experiment. I like the bold colours in your version, in partiuclar they seem to have brought out the far side of the bank nicely. Look forward to seeing a B&W version if you have the time.

I was born and raised in East Anglia

Click to expand...

Whereabouts Stuart? I was born in Norwich, but in Lancashire now. Still flat where I am though, so don't miss those big skies too much!

Thank you for letting me work on your picture, Andy.

Click to expand...

No problem Mary! Lightzone is another program I need to get around to having a look at, seem to come across quite a few folk who rave about it. How have you found it? I like your crop here, places more emphasis on the sky, but keeps enough of the land to provide the setting. Might have a play around along these lines myself.


Cheers,

Andrew Stannard said:

Thanks for the versions so far, a few comments....
No problem Mary! Lightzone is another program I need to get around to having a look at, seem to come across quite a few folk who rave about it. How have you found it?

Click to expand...

LightZone is the best app for picture editing which I've yet used. Of course, I'm pretty much of a novice. Before beginning to read at OPF, I had made serious use only of Adobe Photo DeLUxe, which came bundled with my Kodak DC210 in 1998, and Irfanview, which a friend pointed me to in 2004. I did get Picasa2 when it was recommended to me by Ray West, here at OPF, and it quite wonderfully made a thumbnail library for me. But I haven't found its features to be so advanced as LightZone's.

LightZone has something called "Regions" which I suspect may be the same as "curves" in other programs--PhotoShop? I've never used it, so not sure__and they are complex to master.

And I'm not secure enough mathematically to use LightZone's downsizing offerings--picking out the aspect ratio and pixel dimensions in numbers is hard for me.

Otherwize, LightZone's mechanics are a breeze, and quite intuitive to work with. I like the way that it lets you use sliders to try out your changes, but also supplies the numbers alongside, to let you know the percentage amount of the change you've made.

I like your crop here, places more emphasis on the sky, but keeps enough of the land to provide the setting. Might have a play around along these lines myself.

Click to expand...

That's another nice thing about LightZone, compared to Irfanview. One can try out various crops with the original available for comparison, undo, and try another with great ease. I did save a couple of tries to Desktop and viewed them side-by-side, to see which worked better for me.

This was really fun and good practice for me. But I am still pursuing my main goal, which is to get my image composed as much as possible within the camera's view-finder and view-screen itself. I'm using a Canon G2, in case you haven't seen this info about me elsewhere at OPF.

Looking forward to seeing the takes that others--and you yourself--present here of your picture, Andy.

P.S. One set of my English forebears lived at Wigam, in Lancashire. Didn't get that far south on my one trip to the UK, but my sister did and made a shot of the moated manor farmhouse, which is still occupied as a residence. The ancient-ness of England is awesome!

Mary

Three versions were easy after layering in three and masking (Photoshop). No cropping - the composition was good.
(oops, forgot to sharpen, will do later, time for bed, perhaps a bit too much contrast when viewed on my laptop also)

Straight-up:


Evening:


B/W:


Still like the other shot better

- DL

Mary:

Thanks for the consise review of Lightzone, definately going to have to give it a go in the near future. Not been to America at all myself, so your visit to the UK puts you on up one me!


Don:

Great stuff. I think my preference is for the 2nd variation over the 1st, but I also love the B&W version. You've really managed to get some contrast in the clouds in all of them.

As you've already seen my initial version was a square crop, removing most of the clouds. I didn't experiment with any masking in Photoshop, and I think this led me to find the sky area too 'expansive'.

The gradation to the sky in your versions it seems to stop the eye wandering too far from the tree and out of the frame, and if it does the the extra definition in the wisps of clouds brings the eye back down again. Time for some experimenting.....


Cheers,

Andrew Stannard said:

Mary:

Great stuff. I think my preference is for the 2nd variation over the 1st, but I also love the B&W version. You've really managed to get some contrast in the clouds in all of them.

Click to expand...

Thanks, due to the late night quickie on the b/w I lost tonality in the lower clouds because of the particular channel mixing I did. I'll try and improve on this later tonight.

- DL

My own take. Fairly straightforward, I think. Not as dramatic as Don's.



Levels with a gradient for the sky, a couple of curves to push blue and green on the whole image. The tree came out a bit green, but that would be fairly easy to mask out.

My View

Just joined today - my first post. Here's my attempt:



Cheerz
Kev G

Kevin,

I like the way you just jump in an have a go! The rendering is attractive and the grass is saturated and lush. The tree has a better reflection in the water that helps to bring the picture to life. Brian Lowe and others did that too but this is a little more effective perhaps.

Don Lashier appears to have mastered the sky particularly well. No one has really brought out the dimensionality of the tree yet!

Thanks for your contribution,

Asher

My lightzone version

This was done in Lightzone 3.0, too many steps to mention all
but basically convert to black and white with a orange filter applied,
boosted contrast overall, held back the sky to give detail,
selectively placed the 16 zones to maximise tonal range
added vignette, burned in the foreground foliage,
added a golden tone, used relight tool to bring back the highlights.



Cheers

Excellent tonality Gary, but what did you do about sharpening?

The sky is rendered well. What about opening up the light on either side of the river and the tre and firther sharpening the tree. I'm not saying it needs it, but what do you think. The river leading to the tree is, I think the main subject. The tree should pop!

Anyway, that's what I feel.

On second thoughts, I now see that the tree recapitulates the finger like projections of the sky! That is wonderful. This is a novel and great interpretation. You have made a conversation or intercourse between the tree and the sky.

I'll have to see this on my larger monitor.

Asher

discussion

Could sharpen the tree, but the contrast is really high between the tree and the sky so it starts to halo very quickly.

If anything perhaps the tree could be darker, to contrast with the sky, but I didnt have the time to mask it, would take ages to do it properly. Also the trees on the far left at the back could be darker as well.

I need to find a way to mask tree easily ???

If its intercourse I think it has spawned an offspring only a mother could love

Cheers

my attempt.....

Here is my attempt... I am not at all good with PS, some reason I always struggle with it... anyway, my contribution....



Regards,
Barry

Good to see this pop up again!

I seem to have missed a few of the newer interpretations....

Kevin: As Asher said, the foreground is looking really good in your version - seems to have a lot of 'pop' to me, and detail that didn't really stand out previously.

Garry - I find the toning of this image really pleasant. The very front of the image seems to have darkened down a bit too much, but I'm sure this could be modified with Lightzone's selective editing tools. The sky is coming out nicely too - although no one seems to have matched Don's B&W rendition for bring out the detail.

Barry - I'm intrigued about the sky in this one. Has it been modified using some form of gradient fill? Or is it purely through tonal adjustments? If it's the latter then I'm intrigued to know how you did it! I like the image, but would have to admit that it wasn't quite how I remember the scene. The frame sets it off nicely too.


Looking at the various renditions here I would reallly like to try and combine certain bits from each one! Some seem to work well for the foreground and some for the sky. Off on holiday tomorrow, but might try something when I return.


Thanks for all your versions,

PS

G'Day Andy,

Well, I can tell you it was not the latter.... I used a gradient fill to turn the scene from a daylight to a twilight scene with a slight purple tinge above the horizon. If you asked me to do it again, I don't think I could (to be quite honest)....or it would take me some time....
I also used a warming filter as well to give it that evening glow. Glad you like it at least.Regards,

Barry.

It's really instructive to review each of these images.

I'm impressed by all the various interpretations. It seems to be that different people have optimized one or more but not necessarily all of the following:

• Sky
  
• Tree
  
• Skyline of trees
  
• River
  
• Foreground

Why is it we have such different emphasis?

Asher

I tried to extract lights: shadows/highlights + curves on green and blue channel

Giovanni,

You have done a great job particularly with the foreground vegetation, reflections in the water and tree without destroying the sky.

I'd look to do just a little more, perhaps, in preserving the shading in the tree and enhancing the tonalities in the clouds, if there is in fact the data to do so.

Asher

Another trial.

Giovanni,

Your first effort is hard to beat! The second does so much to the entire picture whereas only a slight change to the clouds might be better. I'd stick with the first picture of yours and be proud of it!

Thanks for your extra effort; you're a sport!

Asher

A last attempt: emphasis on sky, following Asher.
I'm not sure the result is better than my first one as the original sky is very light .

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=andrewstannardriverpicmvi0.jpg

Yes, much better! The picture, Giovanni, is much more open and inviting.

Thanks.

Can you post all 3 maybe just 600 -800 pixels wide so we can see them here together. I'm not sure how to extract the direct url but it's the way you set up the url's of the images you sent me! That's of course if you can squeeze in the time since you have already done a lot!

Again, we love to show things here and keep the eyes on this thread!

Cheers,

Asher

I can post them all at 533x800 to preserve original aspect ratio without cropping.
Do you think that is good?
But, sorry, I don't understand the url question.
At first I was trying to insert the image into the post. But I wasn'nt able to do it. When I click on the image, I'm required to type an url.

If I post the 3 images using ImageShack url is a problem? In this case, may you explain me the correct way?
Thanks a lot.

Giovanni Brembati said:

I can post them all at 533x800 to preserve original aspect ratio without cropping.
Do you think that is good?
But, sorry, I don't understand the url question.
At first I was trying to insert the image into the post. But I wasn'nt able to do it. When I click on the image, I'm required to type an url.

If I post the 3 images using ImageShack url is a problem? In this case, may you explain me the correct way?
Thanks a lot.

Click to expand...

Hi Giovanni

post your image like this (url from your previous post:



the address pasted is _http:link//img213.imageshack.us/img213/996/andrewstannardriverpicmvi0.jpg
using this button

Asher,
I do use the image icon and paste the url in the text box, but the image is not embedded.
I get a link to the image on the server.

This is the result:


The url is inside the IMG tag.

Any suggestion?

Nicolas,
sorry, I thought was Asher, anyway nice to speak with you.

Giovanni Brembati said:

Asher,
I do use the image icon and paste the url in the text box, but the image is not embedded.
I get a link to the image on the server.

This is the result:

The url is inside the IMG tag.

Any suggestion?

Click to expand...

No prob, Ashers is in the back yard making fire for Grace BBQ - private joke (almost ;-)

Take the word "link" off your url and you're set…