Due to the sharpness of the foreground rock and the mountains in the distance and the softness of the water and clouds, I vote for a long exposure and a small aperture. The softness is the result of movement of the clouds and the surface of the water--an old tried and true method.
Are you sure it's from a film camera? It could easily be digital. No grain, very little detail, smooth look.
maybe this is too simplistic and the image needs zone-system metering, which I am not yet capable of
jason henthorne, a photographer, does similar stuff. he originally started in film, don't know if he ever switched to digital. his method was longgggggg exposures, nd filters, small aperture, and lots of research.
What do you mean by research?
jason henthorne, a photographer, does similar stuff. he originally started in film, don't know if he ever switched to digital. his method was longgggggg exposures, nd filters, small aperture, and lots of research.
I lightened it in PS. Plenty of detail in the rock. Probably a "realistic" interpretation was boring. Printing it down gives it more impact, and the our eyes go directly to the rock first. The shutter speed was probably about a second, perhaps a tad longer, depending on how fast the clouds were moving.
wow cool! dodging and burning galore, and exposure must have been on the detail of the rock...
Yes, I believe so. If it were me, I would have based the exposure on the rock.
Jason was originally from Tampa Bay... he reported he spent many hours doing research, specifically using google earth, as well as other resources, on specific locales around the world he was interested in.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?