Back Modifications (4)
Views 65 Unique 36 Award Shortlist   

Langdales from Wrynose Pass

By Bigpoolman
Comments very welcome
I was using the stone wall to come out of the left corner of the frame and curve towards the distant mountains I used a little stopper to smooth the cloud effect and waited until I got a fleeting patch of sun on the fells before taking the image.
A tilt/shift lens was used to get the wall and the distant horizon in focus and a soft ND grad to bring the sky in.
The picture was edited in Lightroom for contrast etc and selective changes made in Photoshop.

Thanks for looking


Tags: Winter Lakes Langdales Wrynose Landscape and travel 2017

Save 69% on inPixio Photo Studio 11 Ultimate (discount applied at checkout)


dudler Plus
17 1.6k 1841 England
13 Jan 2017 7:15PM
This works well as a square crop.

Again, you have a quite small file - I've downloaded somethign 1300 pixels square, and the site now allows you to upload any size, but will resize to 2000 pixels on the long side for downloads (at present).

I get what you're doign iwth the leading line of the wall, but for me it isn't quite there - I think because the wall runs along the bottom of the frame, rather than swooping up into it. I know it's really hard to achieve in a real landscape, but a viewpoint five or six feet higher would make the wall work perfectly. I'm sure Charlie Waite has written about carrying a ladder in his car - though it's not so great if you are walking miles to your shooting location!

There's dramatic light here - and it's confined to a small and distant area. That has a slightly uneasy look, almost overexposed compared with the flat and gentle light on the rest of the scene. I wonder about tonal changes to make all of the image darker, with one small spotlit area. And I'm wondering if an alternative view woul have used a lens around 180 to 210mm...
Niknut Plus
11 2.9k 82 United Kingdom
13 Jan 2017 8:01PM
Beautiful shot !!.........I've added a mod to increase the apparent 'depth' with extra contrast & levels adjustment >!!.Smile
13 Jan 2017 9:16PM
Thanks John and Keith for your comments and suggested mods.
I'll have a look at the file size, didn't even think about it!
Only taken pictures at the location once so can't remember if I can get higher easily or not but will look next time I am that way.
Interested how you done the changes, I used levels on various selections when editing the image but do think your suggestions have added useful depth and made the wall a more interesting feature. Not quite as sure about the colour of the bracken and/or wall which possibly looks a little more saturated.
I'll have a go.
Thanks again

banehawi Plus
16 2.4k 4233 Canada
13 Jan 2017 10:58PM
Tried a mod thats based on the observation that the image is generally underexposed.


paulbroad 13 131 1293 United Kingdom
14 Jan 2017 8:26AM
For me, quite under exposed but with the small highlight area the other way. The most natural mod is that by Willie which looks pretty well as I would expect the scene to be with rather better tones. I think you are trying too hard judging by your details. Did you actually need all the work to arrive at this?

The lighting does not look too demanding.

Compositionally, a lot of middle ground with little in it, then the background with detail and the wall. But there speaks someone who rarely shoots a landscape. One great problem with landscape photography, especially the English lakes, is actually getting something not done many times before and lighting and weather conditions thus become very important.

dudler Plus
17 1.6k 1841 England
14 Jan 2017 11:43AM
Tim -

What you've written is very interesting, and quite revealing. You clearly process a lot, and know a great deal of stuff I don't. The bit about using Levels on various selections is a giveaway - I've only ever used Levels on the whole picture.

So you know and do really clever stuff.

I therefore suspect that Paul's hit the nail on the head about trying too hard. Or, at least, trying too hard at the computer.

I still do darkroom work, and that now feels like a high wire act without a tightrope compared with digital. The premium it puts on getting things right in taking the picture is immense: you have very limited ability to correct things compared with digital.

So you tend to craft the negative in a way that most people don't these days (and I don't know to what extent you do, so please don't be offeneded if you put immense effort and patience into shooting!)

The lesson is, though, that you should take the shot that's there, not the one that's not (and try to reimagine it into what you wanted to see). In soft light, take the details, the closeups, and the big shapes.

By the way, coming back to this makes me appreciate the delicacy of the middle distance.
14 Jan 2017 6:25PM
Thanks for all your comments, much appreciated. I am sort of finding my way into ephotozine so not sure how much detail to provide so if the text below is not very interesting, apologies.

I kinda got dragged kicking and screaming into post processing because I mistakenly thought it was rather cheating as I had no idea what went on in a darkroom.
Having been converted, its clear that it makes a massive difference but I still aim to get it as right as possible in the camera using the histogram, filters, etc etc. The editing is really to get it back to what I saw rather than to create a different picture. We stood for quite a while waiting for the right light which inevitably never quite arrived. I used a tilt/shift and cropped it so that I could get the wall and the distant mountains as sharp as possible.
Basic processing I do in Lightroom rather than camera raw to get a full tonal range, adjust highlights, shadows, clarity and chromatic aberration and any cropping. This takes about a minute usually, maybe two. Some selective editing is usually needed in Photoshop usually using levels and then sharpening for printing, display etc. This can take a few minutes but I'm not adept enough at it to spend too long and whilst I will occasionally use more tools its relatively rare.
I also still have an awful lot to learn about good composition particularly simplifying things.

I was undecided about a few things in the image above which I quite like but...
If I shot from lower, then I can use the wall to block out the middle ground which is less interesting but I also lose the curve which I think is quite crucial, shooting from higher gives me more of a leading line but also gets me more 'boring' middle ground.
Of the mods, I like the extra depth of mod 2, the increased exposure of mod 3 and the wall definition in mod 1. I might want my cake and eat it here...

I will have another go tomorrow and upload a mod.

Thanks again for your comments and hope I haven't bored everyone rigid.


dudler Plus
17 1.6k 1841 England
15 Jan 2017 8:36AM
Definitely not. This is really interesting, and I'm learning.

The light needs to be pretty much right, I think - the pros can spend days wiating for it to be as they want it. Landscape is rather Zen - infiinite patience and lightning reactions.

Which is why I suggest using what is there - this also means you get something different.

As we seem more of yoru work, we'll come ot understand where you're coming from and what you want - hard from the first few pictures. And you'll learn our tendencies, and who 'gets' what you're doing and who struggles...

Pictures are infinitely variable, and that's the beauty of this hobby!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.