Dune

[GB1]

Another sandy dune at White Sands, NM. It seems to have potential, but ... Not sure.

G

[AgingEyes]

Potential, it has. With a darker sky, it may improve. My 2 cents, it is.

[Frog]

Now I've only seen small dunes at the ocean so I'm wondering why the lines in the dune are pretty sharp throughout but there's that blurry line across the bottom of the steep part.
Is this natural or a focus problem caused by something?

[MB1]

This is killer!

I'm thinking a crop on the left to just barely get rid of the plants.

Perfect place for a polorizer filter to pop the sky.

[spiraleyes]

I love it. If it were my picture, I'd darken the sky a bit and increase the contrast. Maybe bump up the saturation too.

[Don Schaeffer]

It's exactly right the way it is in my opinion.

[PhoebeG]

Congratulations.

Phil G.

[Anbesol]

I really like it but I think its just a bit too much sand and not enough sky, if you cropped the top half I think you'd have a really cool panorama. Good capture.

[gahspidy]

GB, great. I also would suggest darkening the sky, and increasing overall saturation. I too notice the odd looking soft spot in the left to middle center where the slope meets the level part
It looks very odd, and I'm curious as to whether it was something you did or naturally occuring.
It's a great image

[Didache]

I like this one! I would be inclined to clone out the bush and maybe boost the contrast just a smidgen to emphasise the textures, but those are relatively small things. It has almost an abstract and minimalist quality.

Cheers
Mike

[GB1]

Well guys, thanks and I am truly surprised to get this type of response to the pic here, especially since I wasn't sure it was a keeper or not (was going through old images, deleting the misses). I think the wavy area in the middle, which is natural and, as far as I can tell, in focus, sort of makes it a novelty (maybe somewhat like an optical illusion).

Anyway - I'm sure what you see here us gone now. Took this in April 07 and those dunes constantly shift: wavy no more.

Tried playing with the blue and managed to shift it to a darker blue (all other adjustments immediately added noise). Upped the contrast a bit too. I also cloned out the bushes: do you notice it, and/or would you have noticed if you hadn't seen the original?

MB, I think I did use a polarizer ..? Maybe ineffective due to the location of the sun (time of day).

Thanks again!

G

[AgingEyes]

Do you know one of Ansel Adams' photos kind of look like this, but B&W?

[Lori11]

WOW! I love the final one! Once again, hanging on my wall I would look even better

[GB1]

Do you know one of Ansel Adams' photos kind of look like this, but B&W?

I never saw that one by Ansel. but do you mean like this ?

Thanks too, Lori!

[gracie_r]

Very cool! I think taking out the tree was a good move.

[shootme]

I'm with Frog, the middle part adds an intriguing effect to the picture? I guess it's natural, maybe the wind catching more at that point? I prefer the original sky though, for me it's warmer.

[danic]

I wouldn't have noticed if the bushes were removed. I think it adds an element to the photo. Just my 2c on a great photo already.

[Greg McCary]

I think just cropping the left side making it more level across the top would work. I think the second edit was pushed to far and you lost the natural blue of the sky. I think as Mike stated a contrast and maybe a levels adjustment would have done the trick.

[Grandpaw]

I'm surprised but I think my vote would go with the Ansel Adams' version, I really like it, Jeff

[AgingEyes]

I never saw that one by Ansel. but do you mean like this ?

See for yourself

http://www.temple.edu/photo/photogra...dams/Dunes.jpg

[GB1]

Thks Grace and Danic, I feel like you that the bush being outta there only makes it cleaner.

Shootme, Greg, Yeah the adjusted sky is really an attempt to make it darker. Just didn't work out that well, bad noise artifacts. Don't know about cropping. I did try it but losing that 'hump' really takes away from the shot. Adding more contrast seemed to lose all the detail in the wavy area. Alas, it is what it is..

Jeff, I am split between the color and B&W. They both have their draws. I am contemplating making an 8 x 12 print of both to see how they look

AE, not a bad shot by Ansel. His composition and/or cropping is quite tricky, kind of throws me. Mine's quite different, more direct. I think the mysterious ones hold up over time though.

G

[jkriminger]

A very nice pic GB..I like the sky color with the sand. Composition wise I think the trees could be somewhere else..maybe lower right...got a shovel? You could fool around with a light stroke of burn around some of the clouds in the upper right here and there. I would like to see your cloned out tree version with original color.

[DrRoebuck]

I like the original the most, due to the artifacts and artificial color of the sky in the modified versions. I also like the plant, FWIW.

The plant would have made an awesome subject if you incorporated it more into the shot.

This is a GREAT capture. Well done.

[Addies Granddaddy]

Nothing to add. I came, I saw, I liked!
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
John

[Grandpaw]

I am going to say something that is going to raise an eyebrow or two. I looked at Ansel Adams' picture and like your desaturated version much better. Ansel Adams has taken some great pictures and has a reputation that is hard to beat but that doesn't make him unbeatable on every shot he has ever taken. I personally like this shot better and really don't care for his at all.

I wonder if these two photographs were put here side to side without names attached just how many people would pick this one also, Jeff