There will be pics

[Barracuda]

Amazing shot chupa. Looking forward to the next result.

[orionid]

But… but… but… I want to mount my camera on a GEM.

[chupathingie]

Clouds. We’re gonna stay in and drink beer, get polluted and play Scorched 3D.

[chupathingie]

Man, have I got a lot of pics to go through… I just got home today, after a full day in Arches Nat’l Park and a day in Albuquerque. Here’s the last image I took in Arches:

I actually got smart and took 10 darks after the series of lightning shots which really cleaned up my singles dramatically. Pretty crappy compression, but when I get around to uploading to flickr (that’s gonna be an all-day affair) I’ll toss a link in. I’ve got 40gig of files to go through, and I put 4000 miles on the jeep in 2 weeks. I’ve got enough pano subs to keep me busy for weeks.

Protip: if any of you folks ever go to see Arches/Canyonlands or anything in that area, take/rent a jeep. 1/2 of Arches you can’t even see unless you want to hike 20 miles or have a 4WD. And I don’t mean a Subaru Forester, either… you need ground clearance; my jeep bottomed out several times. Don’t set out on the trails without another like-equipped vehicle to lead or follow. Just wait by the trailhead for another vehicle, they’ll be more than happy to have an additional vehicle to assist if one gets stuck. The trail I hit in Arches is rated a 6 out of 10 (Tower Arch Trail) and calling it “rugged” is an understatement. I had to back up and get a running start at some of the rock ledges several times to get to the sandy roads on the other side of the ridge, where I had to be towed out. It was a great adventure, though.

[caradoc]

Spiffy!

[ravnostic]

Very nice image!

[Farktographer]

Whoa. Seriously nice photos. I wish I could get some clear skies here.

[chupathingie]

Oblig fisheye shot…

[ravnostic]

Great fisheye shot. Usually I don’t, but here I like the people in the frame, for scale. Nice angle on the double-arch.

[ennuipoet]

Great fisheye shot. Usually I don’t, but here I like the people in the frame, for scale. Nice angle on the double-arch.

That’s funny, if I have the choice I will almost always include people in my landscapes. To me, it communicates a sharing of the moment, of the place, connecting the photographer with the viewer…or at least I hope it does.

[chupathingie]

I like that, ennui. I spend so much time trying to get landscapes devoid of human presence. Part of that I think is due to not wanting to record someone else; I want to “own” the image without worrying over someone’s concerns over being in it, when I probably should not be so concerned. Sometimes the scale (both in presentation and at the scene) makes it moot. There are 3, maybe 4, people in the image underneath the arch left-of-center in this one.

On a side note: Ima jus gonna chalk it up to a learning experience that I shot my pics at Arches in AV mode, as opposed to manual. This one came out, 9 subs where the shutter speed didn’t drift, but most of my pano series’ didn’t fare so well. I’m at a loss to correct the bright and dark zones on the rest of them after several hours of tweaking.

[ravnostic]

That’s funny, if I have the choice I will almost always include people in my landscapes. To me, it communicates a sharing of the moment, of the place, connecting the photographer with the viewer…or at least I hope it does.

Tastes differ. I subscribe to the Ansel Adams thought, “There are always two people in any photograph–the photographer and the viewer” (or something like that). And, of course, there are exceptions.

But I’m a loner. I like being alone in the wild, just me, and my natural gods, it’s a character trait, for good or bad.

In regards to the lighting and variations in the shot chupa, it looks pretty natural to me; I can see from the shadows that the sun is to the right, so it makes sense the sky is brighter over there. YMMV.

[Author]

Posts