Rock and Sky on Mount Whitney

[GB1]

Climbed Mt Whitney in the Eastern Sierras last Friday. I've identified about five or six photos that may be good: here's one of them. C&Cs welcome. Note that it was too burdensome to carry a tripod, so did my best to hand hold the camera steady.

[Greg McCary]

Very nice GB you might work on the blown out sky upper left with the clone stamp and healing brush. Other than that it's fine in my book.

[AgingEyes]

Well, it may be technically well executed and processed, there's nothing there that could suggest to me that it's not just another snap shot. Sorry

[arne saknussen]

I agree with Greg about the small blown out area, but this is a great study in contrast and nature lines.

[armando_m]

is that a lake in the middle ?
did you shoot that closer ?

the mountains looks like out of this world

[Frog]

At 1/1600 you didn't need a tripod for this shot so I would have increased the aperture to increase the dof. Otherwise its a fine shot.

[hminx]

Like armando mentioned the lake could be a bit more prominent . How about you just pop back there and take one a little closer to the lake.......

[GB1]

Thanks for the comments, fellows. As I type this, it's been exactly 7 days since we returned to the trailhead (8 pm PT)!

Greg, Arne - I tried fixing that blow out area, but it doesn't look recoverable. I guess I could clone it out, though I hate to mess with the original scene. Here's another version where I dimmed the highlights a little -- any better?

AE, I agree that there's nothing here in particular which stands out, but I think the ruggedness and sky may make up for it. Anything I could do to improve the shot..?

Armando, Pete - Thanks, and yep, it's a lake, one of many up there .. I'd say you see 10-20 without even looking for them (there was also snow up there too, still melting). Here's a shot taken just before or after that shows the lake a bit better, but I don't feel this shot is as good as the original post (the foreground rock is too bright).

Frog - This is a discussion unto itself. I've always found tripod shots to be sharper, but you have a great point in that when shooting at that fast a SS that it might not make any difference. The reason I shoot F 8.0 a lot of the time is that when focusing mid range at wide angle, everything will be in focus already, and using a smaller aperture will be unnoticeable. I really depends how close you focus though. Also, there's the old advice that most lenses are sharpest at about 3 f stops smaller than wide open: for this 2.8 lens, that's F 8.0, though I've never done my own tests.


Here's the adjustment (1000 pixels) and the other shot of the lake. Note that the light was changing FAST! - GB

[AgingEyes]

AE, I agree that there's nothing here in particular which stands out, but I think the ruggedness and sky may make up for it. Anything I could do to improve the shot..?

Different light or different perspective might help

If all you wanted to do is to showcase the ruggedness and the sky, I think you don't need to show that little bit of lake there. Either none of the lake or more of it if I were taking this shot.

Your second shot is much better.

As usual, my $0.02.