Okay, Mr cornish has absolutely nothing to worry about but I wanted to complete a project and, believe it or not, I have never ever taken a landscape (apart from those misty shots earlier in my portfolio). Being too old and fat to lug an ebony around I used the trusty 10D, and used the pol to bring out the sky and the foliage. I added about three points of saturation, the same of contrast and sorted out the levels in PS but otherwise its just about as it came out of the camera. I don't think its awful but don't expect a career change to landscape anytime soon!
Diane, thanks for the comment but as I keep on saying I'm rounding out my portfolio and trying to complete projects. Its not underexposed, the haziness is from the lack of a UV filter more than anything, coupled with a loss of contrast by merit of the small aperture. In an ideal world I would have exposed this a little more and used an 8ND grad to bring out the sky, but guess what, that was back in the studio attached to the lens that also had my 58mm UV!
I part of what I do for a living is retouch in PS. Usefilm is a bit of a playground where I experiment with things I don't normally do. I therefore try not to use PS for anything other than minor tweaks. Sure I could have burnt in the foreground, stuffed tons of contrast into the frame but thats going too far from what I shot and I'm trying to stop 'overprocessing' everything unless its to achieve an effect difficult/impossible to recreat in camera.
One small point, if I was to genuinely replicate Joe Cornish (it was a joke!) I wouldn't be using a 6.3MP digital SLR. I'd be lugging a big Ebony camera around with me. I know that equipment isn't everything but I think we all have to aknowledge that its foolish to try and match the results from two so radically different formats.
Dear Andrew, Sorry. I would have liked to give you higher ratings but since I have already seen some of Mr. Joe Cornish magnificent landscape pictures... The blue areas of your sky are not saturated enough for this kind of atmosphere - although one's work doesn't always need to be as vibrant as Mr. Cornish's. As for the ground, well, there's simply not enough colors and constrast - but maybe there wasn't any to start with... Isn't it a bit underexposed as well? Often, in landscape photography, you have to find the right spot first, then take on film the most you can get out of it. And what nature - or the shooting - does't give you, you can make up for, to some extent - at the computer with PS... Just a suggestion. Diane
Thanks but I think it sucks! It looks better on my screen full res but it still sucks. I have a better version which I will have to load tomorrow as the site is saying I have exceeded my upload (which I haven't) humph.
0 
