How was this Death Vally

[WarEaglemtn]

http://www.fatali.com/gallery/details.php?id=84&gid=6&

Go to the page listed above, take a good look and tell me how the photographer got this lighting effect at the Racetrack in Death Valley. I know where it was shot and the direction the camera was facing and can't figure out how to do it without double or triple exposing, filtering and major manipulation in the darkroom. If you know how to do this I would be interested in hearing how is is done 'naturally' using only available light.

 

[roteague]

It is a bit suspect. When you consider the lighting is sidelighting and you have this orange "glow" in the background. Since his notes only indicate a single 1 second exposure there would have to be either a major secondary light - to get the glow or a lot of split neutral density filters (even then, I don't think it would work). I think you are right about there being some major manipulation.

 

[Vaughn]

A giant Presto Log burning just over the horizon?

Vaughn

 

[Early Riser]

I think it was manipulated however I have seen similar affects. Here's how it could happen in real life:

Sun coming up low, very yellowish-red and to the right of the rocks. A large cloud in the distance and directly behind the rocks and reflecting the warm light of the sun onto the racetrack. What looks manipulated to me is the very hard edge of the black area. I assume that is the edge of the mountains, the very straight edge bothers me, but I have seen a similar affect before.

 

[Ray Heath]

g'day War
maybe it was unintentional and caused by a light leak or a double exposure

 

[skillian]

As Vaughn already pointed out, this is the clown who got busted for setting fires in Arches National Park that left permenant damage to the rocks.

 

[KenM]

A giant Presto Log burning just over the horizon?

I think Duraflame is his log of choice.

 

[Scott Peters]

Well, my wife, who has seen several race track images, said in less than 10 seconds when I said look at this shot, color was 'doctored' and the mountains were removed..

I think it looks too photoshopped.

 

[Eric Rose]

You know the guy might be a bit of a "salesman" but he has a good eye. I really don't give a crap how he generates his images. To me it's about creating art, not the process. With the exception of techniques that endanger the landscape we are trying to enshrine with our images.

 

[jstraw]

You know the guy might be a bit of a "salesman" but he has a good eye. I really don't give a crap how he generates his images. To me it's about creating art, not the process. With the exception of techniques that endanger the landscape we are trying to enshrine with our images.

I mostly agree with you but I also feel it matters whether or not the image's accompanying "field notes" create an accurate impression.

 

[David Henderson]

"I really don't give a crap how he generates his images"

To a point I agree, but do you care whether he tells the truth, or attempts to mislead, about what he does- because I do. His web-site is unequivocal on this issue and yet here and other forums substantial doubts remain about this and other images of his, with many people who know these areas better than I being convinced that he is not giving the whole story. If he is misleading about the origin of his work then that devalues it a lot in my eyes.

 

[PKM-25]

You know the guy might be a bit of a "salesman" but he has a good eye. I really don't give a crap how he generates his images. To me it's about creating art, not the process. With the exception of techniques that endanger the landscape we are trying to enshrine with our images.

I have to say that I have seen better display's of nature's grandeur at the foot of her own creations than I ever have from some photoshop trickery.

With that said, I think it is a waste of time to engage in such pursuits as the real thing is always better.

When it comes to nature, you just can not top her art.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well, my wife, who has seen several race track images, said in less than 10 seconds when I said look at this shot, color was 'doctored' and the mountains were removed..

I think it looks too photoshopped.

*2

I have been there and that was my reaction. Only the units of time was on the order on nanoseconds.

Steve

 

[mcfactor]

He could have used a flash coming from the side in conjunction with some filter(s). Also, there are many ways of manipulating an image in the traditional darkroom, e.g., without photoshop. He could have just burnt in the sky and exposed the orange area with orange light. He doesnt actually mention in his notes that his images are accurate representations of the world.

 

[Ray Heath]

He could have used a flash coming from the side in conjunction with some filter(s). Also, there are many ways of manipulating an image in the traditional darkroom, e.g., without photoshop. He could have just burnt in the sky and exposed the orange area with orange light. He doesnt actually mention in his notes that his images are accurate representations of the world.

g'day all
interesting comments

i agree withn David that if he misleads it devalues his work, but is darkroom manipulation ok?

how much is ok?

do we accept and value darkroom manipulation more than we do digital manipulation?

why?

Ray

 

[Mateo]

I think it's fake but there's nothing wrong with that. It's a modern version of them huge grasshopper postcard photos from a bunch of years ago.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Oh crap! I just can't stop myself tonight

do we accept and value darkroom manipulation more than we do digital manipulation?

Me? Yes.

why?

Because every subsequent print made of that image would have to exhibit the same control of processes, the same mastery of craft to produce. There are so many malicious 'Darklings' (as I call them) lurking in darkrooms ready to inject mystifying variables into the dodging, burning, masking, developing, fixing, washing, toning, drying, spotting, matting and framing sequences of each and every photograph. Only the truly vigilant endure over the Darkling hoard!

Then again...you could just push a button.

Put another way; if I saw two quilts which were identical in every way, but one was made by hand and the other made by machine, I'd prefer the hand made one. Call me crazy...but the hand of the artist is important to me.

Murray

 

[Tom Stanworth]

...Call me crazy...but the hand of the artist is important to me.

Murray

Me too. As far as this image goes it looks manipulated to me too. The fact that he lists how long he waited for the light for each image suggests he is trying to add value somehow. I dont care whether a person waits 0.2 seconds for the light if the image is a good one. Some of his other images look reasonably straight but this one does not seem to add up...but then again I have never been to this area and am not familiar with the ground and climatic factors that could give unusual effects. I dont see how you would get such a crisp line between that organge glow on the ground and the black whatever it is. slide film might not have the greatest range on earth but it is not that bad. I would have expected it to have reocrded something of a dark background perhaps of rock.

No doubt about it, the image looks great. I personally like to feel that images broadly reflect a reality even if there is a departure in interpretation and presentation of that. If an image has been doctored in a way that crosses that reality line, I lose all interest. I dont know where that line is until I see the image. With this one, it leaves me feeling uncertain which pretty well prevent me from being able to enjoy the image.

 

[Stephen Frizza]

This image looks worked I did a similar dramatic effect on a landscape based in Australia. It can be done in darkroom and more easily in photoshop. If I were printing it from the Transperancy in the darkroom I would look at masking off the sky to ensure it is going to print black then expose the image for the fore ground and then in a third step burn in the yellow glow with a different filtration. I don't know the location in this shot, but would love the photographer to share more information as to the images creation. I really like this image and I love images that make us think.

~steve

 

[Loose Gravel]

BOGUS

 

[jd callow]

I think it's fake but there's nothing wrong with that. It's a modern version of them huge grasshopper postcard photos from a bunch of years ago.

pretty much how I feel.

This image looks worked I did a similar dramatic effect on a landscape based in Australia. It can be done in darkroom and more easily in photoshop. If I were printing it from the Transperancy in the darkroom I would look at masking off the sky to ensure it is going to print black then expose the image for the fore ground and then in a third step burn in the yellow glow with a different filtration. I don't know the location in this shot, but would love the photographer to share more information as to the images creation. I really like this image and I love images that make us think.

~steve

If it were a neg I see it as 2 colour burns with a major 3rd burn for the sky/mountains whatever it is. On an image this broad it wouldn't be that difficult. I see this as being more graphic art than 'Fine Art' whether it is photoshoped or darkroom manipulated.

 

[roteague]

do we accept and value darkroom manipulation more than we do digital manipulation?

I don't accept any manipulation when it comes to nature.

 

[Dinesh]

I don't accept any manipulation when it comes to nature.

What about Pamela Anderson?

 

[roteague]

What about Pamela Anderson?

Gee..... Can't argue with that one.

 

[Ray Heath]

I don't accept any manipulation when it comes to nature.

what about colour filters, graduated filters, lens selection, film selection, exposure control, perspective, lens selection, time of day, printing control, subject choice, etc, etc, ......