Horseshoe Bend Morning

Alain Briot said:

Phase One P45 eight-images collage
24,000 x 20,000 pixels​

Click to expand...

Hi Alain,

This seems to be a favorite of yours and it's getting that way with me. I've not yet been there myself but I'll have to try to find some new point of view. seems one needs an helicopter! That pictures will print at 8ft wide at 240 dpi and one could go to within 10" of the picture and not have breakup!

I would love to see a small portion with detail so I could imagine what it would look like right up close. Could you perhaps let us see a slice from shore to shore on the horseshoe. I'm sure it will be amazing detail.

Thanks for sharing.

Asher

Asher,

Thank you.

The sky and the land were taken at different times, about 20 minutes apart I believe.

The field of view is over 160 degrees since part of the scene was partly behind me.

ALain

Alain,

What did you use for stitching and blending? Since we cannot see inside your massive picture, could you share a slice so we can see what we might see if we were next to this massive print! Otherwise it could be taken with a 5D and several 14mm images.

Asher

I use Photoshop CS4 Photomerge to stitch the image. The file is 2.5GB in size, without layers. I can't save it with layers because it exceeds CS4's maximum image size for storage which is 4GB. If someone knows about a workaround that makes it possible to save files larger than 4GB I'd be thankful if you can share it here.

I don't have a slice of the photograph for posting.

ALain

Edited duplicated text and linked to that same text in specific current thread in OPF

I received several emails about the copyright notice on the image in this thread and on my other images.

Post Edited: Text rather understandable but really "off topic" to the fine Horseshoe Bend photograph in this thread and also this is this is currently presented by A.B. here in another current thread started by Doug Kerr. So I have edited this post to have folk go to the specific thread for that new topic on image © and identification. Asher

Alain Briot said:

I use Photoshop CS4 Photomerge to stitch the image. The file is 2.5GB in size, without layers. I can't save it with layers because it exceeds CS4's maximum image size for storage which is 4GB. If someone knows about a workaround that makes it possible to save files larger than 4GB I'd be thankful if you can share it here.

I don't have a slice of the photograph for posting.

ALain

Click to expand...

Hi Alain
you can save it as a "Photoshop Large Document" (.psb)
info on 16 bit file / 5.74 Mb :



You may also save it as a PS raw file, but I never tried that…

Hope this helps!

PS is that info/tip enough to get "a slice of the photograph" ? ;-)

I have to say, that's "art!" Just lovely, Alain.

Hi Rachel,

Thank you for your compliments

Nicolas,

I did not know about .psb files. So I very much appreciate your help with this also. I ran into this problem the first time with this image which is the largest one I created so far.

My problem with slices is that it drives people into pixel peeping which I have no interest getting into whatsoever.

Alain

Post related to © and identifying authorship of images moved here.

Here we have an impressive gigantic image of horseshoe bend taken with amazing technology. We have only skimmed on the surface of understanding the esthetics and value of the picture. We have no knowledge of what it actually might show if we visited the picture in an exhibition.

We have no idea how this image, as shown, is different from that taken by most any other fairly good cameras and fairly good technique. It looks delightful but in what way is this different?

Of course one could say

• vantage point,
  
• timing
  
• way it is processed

But that description hardly represents the substance and geststalt, value and relevance of the picture. Forget about pixel peeping! I have no interest in that. However, I do like some intimacy and deeper feeling for the scene. This is essentially a thumbnail of a huge detail-rich picture, like a picture of a stadium where one cannot identify what game is being played.

My questions here might generate it's own new thread on the problems of presenting large images, but for the purposes of getting into this image, I for one would like to see what the water and shore and any creatures look like so I can have some feeling for the sort of presence the entire picture might command, if I were there.

Asher

You may want to compare the image in this thread to one I previously posted in another thread in the same section (medium format digital):

Alain,

One of the disadvantages you have is that you were there and you know the scene and have looked at the entire photograph. Here, right here in the second image I'm suddenly able to feel the splendid and humbling grandeur of the place! That's just be being brought closer to then central portion. But this is not so astounding to you as you already know this, it's imprinted in your brain! We needed to see that. I'm very much impressed by how much I gained experientially just by seeing that second image once again, but in the context of the wider view more compressed image.

Now I'm even more keen to see what the water's edge and the adjacent features and any vegetation look like. I'm telling yuou that soing this adds so much life to your first picture!

Asher

Alain Briot said:

40" x 50" print size crop from Horseshoe Bend Morning
This crop shows the level of detail in a 40" x 50" print of this image
as seen when using Photoshop's "View at Print Size" command​

Click to expand...

Thanks so much Alain. This really changes everything as it immediately gives us a realization of the height of things. The view down to the water is awesome. I had no inclination at all that this emotion was built in to your initial photograph.

Wow!

I'm not supposed to say that for a photograph posted here, but I'm truly moved. Now I'm convinced that this, perhaps should be a way of translating a successful representation of some of the grandeur of such a picture. When we work with such images, we have so much built into out memories and it's easy to imagine that what's written in the image is so obvious in the 600-800 pixels wide representation of the 2GB image. Actually the excite we have in conceiving of and making the image is so easy to be reinvoked by one glance that we can forget that no one else was there with us.

To this end, these shared portions are helpful to get some sense of the large scale photograph that must have it's own personal presence. I saw this with nicolas claris 12 foot high pictures of ocean going sailing yachts. These pictures have accommanding presence that need to be experienced first hand.

Asher

BTW, what lens was used here?

Hi Asher,

Thank you.

The photograph is taken with a Hasselblad SWCM-CF which has a built in 38mm biogon lens.

However, this is a stitch of 8 photographs (4 for the land, 4 for the sky) so the field of view is over 160 degrees, far more than the Biogon 38mm covers.

This crop is actually from a print smaller than the maximum size print I can make from this image. However, since my printer can print 40" wide maximum, I did not want to show something I cannot print. I could be printed 80x100 and still retain nice detail.

And, Nicolas, I saved the 40x50 version in Photoshop large file format. Thank you for that.

ALain

Alain Briot said:

Hi Asher,

Thank you.

The photograph is taken with a Hasselblad SWCM-CF which has a built in 38mm biogon lens.

Click to expand...

Hi Alain,

That SWC with its Biogen is a treasure. My father in law would use it even for events with a whole dance floor. Mostly he'd use it for scenics with B&W film. The ability today to add even a modest Phase One or other digital back and stitch makes this classic camera into perhaps one of the most useful travel and landscape cameras ever.

Asher

Asher,

I agree. With a digital back it is most likely the most compact, if not the smallest and lightest medium format digital camera in the world. I'm often told that "digital medium format cameras are supposed to be big!" To which I respond "not all of them!" I love it. Plus, the lens is superb. It's not a retrofocus WA so there's no compromise in the design.

ALain

Alain Briot said:

Asher,

I agree. With a digital back it is most likely the most compact, if not the smallest and lightest medium format digital camera in the world. I'm often told that "digital medium format cameras are supposed to be big!" To which I respond "not all of them!" I love it. Plus, the lens is superb. It's not a retrofocus WA so there's no compromise in the design.

ALain

Click to expand...

There are two versions of the Biogen design. The original ones have 10 optical elements and at least the early ones were not multicoated so one needs to think of glare shooting into the light. These are amongst the finest lenses made. One can only go better by using a Mamiya 7 which has the orginal design and is multicoated. The 43 mm lens for the Mamiya 7 film camera is supposedly unmatched. However, one cannot use digital in that camera!

I still think that the SWC is one of the most practical cameras to own!

Asher