[Rob Barron]

Another shot taken of the mist as seen in my other shot last week. However, this was taken of the view 90 degrees to the right from the previous one and a little bit earlier before the sun came up fully. There was no orangey colour at that stage, it was quite cold and blue so I mono'ed the shot and tinted it which I feel works nicely. There were ugly pylons going over the distant hills but I took those out. Why the hell we insist on scarring our beautiful landscape with those monstrosities I will never know but there we go.

For the technical side (which i nearly always forget to list), this was with my Canon 40D, 100mm f2.8 lens, 1/40th sec, F10, ISO 640.

It doesn't look at all noisy in the high res original but on here it is showing a bit grainy. I don't think it affects it too much though I prefer the smooth mist of the print.

Hope you like it, CC as always appreciated.

Cheers,
Rob

[Markulous]

Lovely! And very nicely framed by the trees.

Could maybe do with a touch more contrast on the hills behind but very minor. I assume you didn't use your tripod (ISO640)?

[Rob Barron]

I did Mark. I went for ISO640 because I wanted to reduce the aperture down to keep a sharp shot. Although it was a still misty morning at ground level, the trees were swaying and if I had gone slower than 1/40th sec I would have got blurred leaves which i didn't want. Hope that makes sense.

I have to say ISO 640 is not a major problem on the Canon 40D, it really is excellent for noise limiting. I wouldn't go beyond 640 unless I was really pushed to get a shot I could hold but I am happy enough to go up to this speed on occasion.

The distant hills were very misty and it was hard to get any contrast. i did try dodging and burning it in a touch but I wasn't happy with it so I left it. i do agree a touch more would be preferable.

Cheers,
Rob

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by Rob Barron

I did Mark. I went for ISO640 because I wanted to reduce the aperture down to keep a sharp shot. Although it was a still misty morning at ground level, the trees were swaying and if I had gone slower than 1/40th sec I would have got blurred leaves which i didn't want. Hope that makes sense.

Ah, right! Thanks! Lucky the breeze didn't shift the mist

[Geir Andersen]

OK, now I'm just jealous .
Superb shot as always, and the framing is just spot on. Love the tint.

[fionaB]

already told you what i think of this shot.... I hate it its horrible and i hate you for taking it.......... of course im a terrible liar as well............. another stunning shot as we have all come to expect from you..... everything else has been said.


Fi

[Charlotte]

This is just lovely Rob, well captured

Only one small criticism: Could you clone out the rooftops? They are the only blot on the landscape

[danpen]

I always have mixed emotions about mist, it seems so peaceful and relaxing and yet, you never know what it it's hiding, so it's kind of sinister as well.

Great shot, excellent detail in the foreground and a lovely dreamy background.

cheers

Dan

[KenCo]

Originally Posted by Rob Barron

CC as always appreciated.

Lovely scene and quite like the colour tint I think. Two things bother me though and because it's in this section I hope you don't mind me mentioning. Firstly bottom left of frame over the wall there is a very sharp line separating the field from the mist when everything else is very soft.....really catches my eye. Which leads me to the second, With the mist keeping everything so soft I really would have like the foreground to be in focus, though I am finding it difficult to find anything that looks in focus. I realise that this me be to do with resizing for web and all that but just thought i'd mention it.
Ken.

[Rob Barron]

hi Ken, I am always open to CC so no worries there

The foreground in the original is tack sharp, but to get this below 200kbs I had to compress very heavily. it must have lost a lot of detail in that process but it's a fair point you make. The line you mentioned is actually the top of a roof which i considered cloning out but felt it didn't look right at all so left it. Along the top of the roof is a reflective strip of metal, lead or whatever (I'm no builder LOL) and it is picking up the darker 'reflection' of the tree immediately in front of it hence it looks dark and more crisp for part of it than the other part. you can't really tell that on here, I had to go and look at the original to work that one out! I think I'll leave it as it is but I can see why it does look slightly odd if you don't see the detail up close.

Glad you made those comments, it made me go and look closely to see what was happening which is no bad thing

Cheers,
Rob