Landscape photographs (gimped)


(yfkar.) #1

The title pretty much says it all. Canon S1 IS + Gimp.

http://koti.mbnet.fi/yfkar/jarvi_testi_2.jpg

http://koti.mbnet.fi/yfkar/pelto_myrsky_s.jpg

http://koti.mbnet.fi/yfkar/latopanoraama_sm.jpg

And as a bonus, a watercolor I did a few years ago in school: :wink:
http://koti.mbnet.fi/yfkar/nuotio_smaller.jpg
Don’t really like how the fire turned out :\


(Rocketman) #2

I really like the skies; you should try to make some skymaps.


(Cativo) #3

Nice, I really like the second one!


(rndrdbrian) #4

Really nice photos.

Except the landscape in the foreground is a little on the dark side (especially photo 2)

Do you know about contrast masking?

Basically you duplicate the layer, convert it to grayscale (desaturate), invert the colours, then use this layer as an “overlay” to the original image on the layer below. Then adjust the opacity of the contrast masked layer. You can also blur the contrast mask layer a bit too.

Doing this will brighten the landscape a bit, but will lose a bit of darkness from the clouds.

My apologies if you already know about this! :smiley:


Brian


(yfkar.) #5

Thank you all!

rndrdbrian: Didn’t know that one, the foreground is pretty dark on purpose. But I’ve got to admit that it looks better a bit lighter. Good tip. :slight_smile:


(rndrdbrian) #6

yfkar, contrast masking (wha the above process is called) is a good thing to try on most images. It doesn’t affect anything permanantly (unlike adjusting brightness / contrast or gamma etc), and it gives you a lot of control.

Plus it also tends to sharpen quite between the sky and background mountains / trees / horizon line etc.

Don’t credit me for inventing this though, I learned it from a friend of a friend on an online forum somewhere!

:slight_smile:


Brian


(GCat) #7

very good effort yfkar. landscape / sky stuff is often very hard to make interesting and is difficult to capture. I also prefer No. 2 - very dramatic and I love the texture of the ?wheatfields. something looks strange in No 1 - which detracts from what is an interesting image. I didn’t find anything especially visually interesting in no 3.