Which Do You Like?

[Mike Lewis]

So I am still trying to get the hang of this critique forum, so not sure this is exactly what is expected here. Please feel free to chime in on that if it seems like this is mis-posted here.

So I am going to post 2 images shot on the same hike, from a very similar location. While I am sure there could be some debate on the post processing itself,m I am more looking for feedback on which image has better visual impact (which image you like more and why I guess essentially.) Along those same lines then is the companion question - are these both visually interesting enough to be posted on my main image hosting site, or is it redundant to have both. I often struggle with this sort of thing, and frequently limit my postings to a single shot from a location, when in fact I might have multiple images that could possibly all have some merit as interpretations of what is largely the same scene.

So I am not posting anything to be edited by anyone, but I am open to editing input (you could lighten the sky, dial back the saturation, bring up the shadows, etc. etc.) as well as more of the compositional input (crop off the lower 1/4, lose the blown out clouds, etc. etc.) as well as the which image is 'more impactful' and why.

So here are the 2 shots. These are taken in Norway (put that country on your bucket list!) in the Lofoten Islands (put that part of Norway on your high priority bucket list!) and there are some funny stories that could be passed on about this hike in particular, but since I am SURE I am already WAY too long winded on this I will save that unless it is requested to be passed on.

1st image from the hike, most of the distance up Mannen, in Vestvågøy, Lofoten Islands, Norway

LRCC_HikeUpMannen_VC1_FW_TAP20062_PSCC

• Mike Lewis
• Dec 14, 2018

Hike up Mannen, in Lofoten Is., Norway

2nd image from as high up as I got on Mannen, in Vestvågøy, Lofoten Islands, Norway

LRCC_HikeUpMannen_FW_LRCC_sRGB_TAP20080_1_2_co

• Mike Lewis
• Dec 14, 2018

Hike Up Mannen, Lofoten Is., Norway, a view from as high up as I got.

Thanks for giving me whatever honest input you wish on this pair of images and how they compare to each other.

ML

 

[Kyle Jones]

Tough call. In both cases I like the processing. The colors are rich but not garish and the sky is nice and moody. I'd look at the hot spot in the sky in the first, but that's about it.

OverallI think I like the first better, just because I can see more details in the narrower view. It does suffer a little from the lower elevation. There's less separation between the land masses than in the second and I'd like to see water at the end of the center peninsula like in the second.

So that said, I make similar decisions for my online galleries and would probably only use one of these. If you have a different view of the first that completes the middle peninsula then that would be the winner for me. If not, I could see going back and forth depending on my mood.

 

[AlanLichty]

I'll go the opposite direction from Kyle as I prefer the second one. The first one does a nice job of pulling my focus more the to foreground and the immediate pastoral scene below but I like the stronger feeling of depth to the overall setting in the second one. The moment I saw the second one the lines in the scene and the wider perspective pulled my focus through the scene out to the distant waterways behind.

As I went back up to the first one I could see the neat shorelines but since they are disconnected by the framing there is no sense of continuity for me. I like the exposure and color processing in each just fine as is.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Alan and Kyle,

Great inputs both of you thanks! I guess I feel better about being conflicted over my favorite one anyway
ML

 

[JimFox]

Hey Mike,

I read Kyles and Alans comments, I scrolled back and forth for a while because I like them both. But in the end, I settled on #1. And I will tell you why, and for me it's pretty simple once I caught it. In #1, the focus is on the land and the clouds are just a supporting cast along with a super cool beam of light. In #2, the clouds end up being the focus because the occupy so much of the shot.

For me, I decided that what was most important from that view? The ground. Only in #1 does the ground get emphasized, in #2 it's the sky that is emphasized. So for me, I believe it is the cool land that is the true focus, with having the clouds be the supporting cast. That ground is too special for it just to play a supporting role.

So along with Kyle, I would recover the blown highlights in #1 in the sky on the right. I also would just slightly tone down the 2 beach areas as they are a bit too bright for my taste and kind of pull the eye a bit.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Thanks for posting here, this is a perfect example of what this forum should be. I am going to comment before reading the others.

First image. Has too much man made stuff, especially that red roofed structure. I could see making a 16x9 crop with the bottom removed. But the second is a stronger image and I don't see needing both.

Second image. I like the sky which if not the main subject, is a dominant feature and in a good way. This also seems like a higher viewpoint and featured a larger expanse of water. I would also consider cropping just above the fork in the road. I like the processing and the overall composition. The subject is good and this is a keeper image.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Wow, great inputs. Glad to know this is an appropriate way to reap the benefits of posting in the Critique Forum. Lots of good info to chew on. I am no closer to picking a favorite though, as I see the good aspects pointed out in both images. But it is great to get unbiased feedback from so many established and accomplished landscape shooters here, just invaluable!

Thanks,


ML

 

[Mike Lewis]

OK, so I tried my hand at recovering the highlights in #1, as suggested by 2 of you. At least at my skill editing level, I cannot get anything workable out of it. So how do I go about posting a version of this so you guys could take a crack at it, and then hopefully pass on your expertise if something comes out that looks decent?

@Jim Fox
@Kyle Jones


ML

 

[Ben Egbert]

Go to lets play and look at the instructions for posting a DNG. If you like, you can email the dng to me and I will get it into this post. Alternativly, you can make whatever size raw or TIFF and make a link at "wetransfer" and they wilk email a link to you which you can copy and paste here. If you have bracketed the shot, put a darker version there as well for the blown out recovery.

https://wetransfer.com/

 

[stevendillonphoto]

I like the second image the best. It has a better feel. The dark hillside in the first image (especially where it is placed - on the upper left hand side) throws the balance off for my eyes.