Icon Alert -- The Washerwoman

[Nathaniel Alpert]

I hope some will enjoy my rendition of this icon of the southwest-- The Washerwoman viewed from Mesa Arch at sunrise. For those who may be interested, the technical details are Canon 5D, 24-105 F4.5, IS L lens, Tripod and mirror lockup. f22 @ 1/15 sec zoom=75 mm ISO 200.

For those (few?) who don't know, Mesa Arch is located in the Island in the Sky district of Canyonlands National Park, about 1/2 mile from the road. This picture was shot in early October of this year and there were 20 other photographers, give or take, arrayed in front of the arch that morning. Still, one is lucky to just to see this special natural spectacle.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I hope some will enjoy my rendition of this icon of the southwest-- The Washerwoman viewed from Mesa Arch at sunrise. For those who may be interested, the technical details are Canon 5D, 24-105 F4.5, IS L lens, Tripod and mirror lockup. f22 @ 1/15 sec zoom=75 mm ISO 200.

For those (few?) who don't know, Mesa Arch is located in the Island in the Sky district of Canyonlands National Park, about 1/2 mile from the road. This picture was shot in early October of this year and there were 20 other photographers, give or take, arrayed in front of the arch that morning. Still, one is lucky to just to see this special natural spectacle.

Nathaniel,

I immediately enjoyed the sunrise light catching the mid ground rocks. I had written previously but lost my initial post and so here goes again. I think these national rock monuments and so many great pictures really must inhibit folk as I see people so few replying to the best pictures. I guess being iconic, people are scared of saying something that is permanently a spotlight on their own (they fear), lesser judgement and experience.

Being no expert on shooting this famous location, I cannot say how unusual your chosen point of view is. I do like the way you have framed the scene with the bold arch of stone above. Is the shadow opened up or did you use flash? I feel somehow for that with such rich color and brightness, there might be a shortage of detail.

I'm going! to look up how this monument has been photographed by others. I needed to fill in some gaps here

Asher

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

Asher,

It's very nice to have your comments and critique. It is disappointing that the conversation is so exclusive.

This is one of a an extensive series I took as the sunrise developed. It is a little different than the usual composition, as the arch is just a bold splash of color framing the top of the image; most photographers include more arch, top and bottom. Of course, the trade off is that in that case the washer woman is smaller and less important to the composition.

Now, your comment about lack of detail might be right as I was using f22, but my print of this shot is satisfactory. The dynamic range is large. No flash was used but the shadows were opened in lightroom with the fill light.

 

[Alain Briot]

I'm not convinced that the lack of responses is due to having a photo of a famous location. Are there htat many more people commenting on images of unknown locales?

For me the image is nice in regards to the background. But in regards to the arch itself what is there to see is not enough for me.

One of the problems of photographing icons is that very often the way to move away from iconic representation lets the icon out altogether... I work with icons regularly, and it is challenging to find a new way to represent them without taking them out at the same time. The solution is not easy and there's not one solution that works best.

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

Alain,

You have responded to Asher's observations about lack of response to this and other attempts at "iconic" compositions. I share your feeling that it is merely a lack of response not related to its iconic ambitions. Dissapointing, since there is much to criticise in this image.

On the other hand, your critical observations are just what i am seeking. It is interesting that you wanted more Arch. I was expecting some to suggest removing the Arch completely. Cropping (Leaving) out the strip of Arch would further emphasize the Washerwoman, retaining iconic status I think, while focusing the compostion. Of course iconic status is not what I am striving for at all. In addition to the choice of Arch or no Arch, one can question the balance of the lighting. The foreground is brightest, but the subject is more distant. How distracting are the strong highlights on the rock faces in the lower left? How would you handle that?

And I would appreciate not only Alain's comments but some response from the forum members.

 

[Alain Briot]

Nathaniel,

The problem is several folds:

1-It's all already been done. Photos of the Washerwoman alone, without the arch, have been done. Photos with a small part of the arch have been done. Photos of the whole arch have been done. Photos with people running on top of the arch, biking on it, camping, picknicking, you name-it-on-it have been done.

2- You can't really count on being different by using a "new" angle of view. It may be possible, but the stakes are high and if you do so you have to be REALLY creative, not just a little creative. Why? Because of what I just mentioned above.

3-To put it simply, just using part of the arch isn't going to make you stand out. You have to go WAY further than that! How far? That's up to you. The answer is yours to find. I can only point to what I just wrote.

4-Whether the Washerwoman is visible or not depends on the print size. At 500 pixels wide on the web you can't see it unless you use a telephoto lens. At 40x50 on a wall you can see it even if you used a wide angle lens.

5-Sometimes it's really great to take a photo you like, regardless of whether it has been done or not. Who cares if its been done. You have to start somewhere. I've only photographed once at that location and this is one of the images from this shoot. I like it a lot. And yes, I can see the Washerwoman very well because it is a 4x5 photograph and because I can print it at 40x50. Size matters (see my essay: Subject Matter and Print Size) :

Let me know if this helps.

Alain

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

Alain,

Your comments are very helpful and express the point of view of a commercial landscape photographer and artist. I, on the other hand, am coming at this as a travel and amateur landscape photographer who has only one very demanding client -- myself. As an amateur photographer traveling through a place like Canyonlands, one has little knowledge of the area and only a short time on site. One knows the photographic potential of a place like Mesa Arch through the many famous photos that have been published. But when you pull up to the parking lot in the dark, it’s all a bit confusing. It is not that likely that I will have an opportunity to go back and try it again. Still, I am seeking critiques like the one you were so kind to offer in the hope that the information is general enough to be applied in the future. Among the photos I took that morning, were several that were similar in composition to the one you posted. But as you understood, I wanted to go beyond that. This was one of the extremes in the compositional matrix I explored, from wide angle to short telephoto. It is not the best of that shoot but in my mind, it has some potential. It seemed to me that I was close to, but had not achieved, a valid photographic statement. Perhaps I can get a penetrating comment that will help me refine my thinking. It does not matter to me whether I can make the most unique photo; it is for my pleasure and satisfaction, part of my response to the scene. I have read many of your essays but I don’t recall if you have noted that while the overall scene is constant, each day and each moment yield a different photographic potential. It may only be a minor variation, or, if one is very lucky, something more. To illustrate this point, one need only compare our photos to realize that though the scene is the same, taken at the same time of day, the light is quite different. Taken at different times of year, the sun is rising far to the left in your shot, whereas in mine it is on the right.

It is those moments one treasures and to capture that essence is my goal. .

 

[Alain Briot]

Nathaniel,

Actually I was pretty much in the same situation as you when I went there. It was my first visit, I went there in the dark (hours earlier to reserve a seat and set up 2 4x5 cameras!) and I did not know what to expect.

I have read many of your essays but I don’t recall if you have noted that while the overall scene is constant, each day and each moment yield a different photographic potential. It may only be a minor variation, or, if one is very lucky, something more. To illustrate this point, one need only compare our photos to realize that though the scene is the same, taken at the same time of day, the light is quite different. Taken at different times of year, the sun is rising far to the left in your shot, whereas in mine it is on the right.

Correct. I make this point in several of my essays, but I have so many it's easy to miss I go about this in depth in my composition tutorial for example.

This also points to the fact that there is not a single time of year that's better. It's always good. Simply different.

One thing that you may want to take away from this is that you can't go from beginner to pro overnight. It takes time to develop the necessary experience. I wrote elsewhere that researchers say it takes 10,0000 hours to develop mastery in any field. That's about 20 years at 2 hrs a day and 5 days a week. How often do you practice? They use to say "shoot a roll a day every day". Now it's more difficult to count because flash cards vary in capacity, yet you should work at this everyday, keeping in mind that the more you practice the better you will get. Also, getting advice from from people who are where you want to be is a good idea. And work work work. That's what I do. I work on average 12 to 16 hrs a day on the creative aspects of photography and on marketing my business. It takes that much to succeed. Anything less would let me out cold! THe other pros I know work just as much. It's not specific to me.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I hope some will enjoy my rendition of this icon of the southwest-- The Washerwoman viewed from Mesa Arch at sunrise. For those who may be interested, the technical details are Canon 5D, 24-105 F4.5, IS L lens, Tripod and mirror lockup. f22 @ 1/15 sec zoom=75 mm ISO 200.

For those (few?) who don't know, Mesa Arch is located in the Island in the Sky district of Canyonlands National Park, about 1/2 mile from the road. This picture was shot in early October of this year and there were 20 other photographers, give or take, arrayed in front of the arch that morning. Still, one is lucky to just to see this special natural spectacle.

Before going to classic pictures, the "washerwoman" suddenly was there and I understood. What splendid icon indeed. I'm afraid I'm not yet fully up to date on the great U.S. National Parks. Probably Cem and Fahim perhaps have seen much more than I have!

I'd really consider a long lens and focus stacking to build a clear detailed form of the washerwoman's physicality. The rest of the scene does not necessarily need such impressive attention. In fact that would be all the more interesting.

The arch then could be shown a little more prominently and would frame her well.

This kind of scene can be deceiving in that one might think it's not detail rich. It would be worthwhile to first get the composition right with a simple digital camera and a zoom lens. Take as may shots as needed. Then plan a stitched composite.

Now here's where film can really be an advantage. If you have a film you know, then you can just do well with 5 film holders and 19 sheets of film. There's a good chance, that after carefully selecting your choice view, you can get everything in one go with a 4x5 camera on a tripod. There are really inexpensive new and even used 4x5 cameras. I do not know the distance you re from the arch and lady. What was the actual focal length used in a shot taking in the entire arch and the washerwoman?

You can get a used a 4x5 Crown Graphic for about $200-250 with a 120-150mm lens. I'd get a feel for the emulsion by shooting 35mm film rocky landscapes cenes with several film types that are available for 4x5. You might need a 90mm lens instead of the standard lens. KEH.com is a good source.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nathaniel,

The problem is several folds:

1-It's all already been done. Photos of the Washerwoman alone, without the arch, have been done. Photos with a small part of the arch have been done. Photos of the whole arch have been done. Photos with people running on top of the arch, biking on it, camping, picknicking, you name-it-on-it have been done.

Hi Alain,

I enjoyed both your comments and the picture. Each person will find a different point of view that gives them joy. That's what one should do. This can be a picture postcard, maybe art and perhaps both. However, I'd hope it's the best scene one can imagine.

Asher

 

[Alain Briot]

Some other compositions from the same shoot:

and

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

Hi Asher,

You have given me a lot to think about and that is just what I wanted. I hope you can see some of these areas for yourself. There is nothing as dazzling to me as the southwestern US. These scenes are challenging to photograph and I want to challenge you to provide some more ideas by pointing out some difficulties with your suggestions:

As the sun peaks above the distant mountains the light is changing very rapidly and the sun rises perceptibly from frame to frame, making it very difficult to do focus stacking. The shallow angle of the sun and the flat illumination of the monuments limit the detail that can be seen with the naked eye. It is not clear to me how one could use a long lens AND "show the arch a little more prominently." My recollection is that I was shooting at 75 mm and without moving back considerably, a longer lens would give too tight a perspective.


"This kind of scene can be deceiving in that one might think it's not detail rich. It would be worthwhile to first get the composition right with a simple digital camera and a zoom lens. Take as may shots as needed. Then plan a stitched composite."

I think that the idea of stitching is really good, something that I am going to work on. However, I doubt it can be made to work effectively while the light is changing so rapidly.

"Now here's where film can really be an advantage. If you have a film you know, then you can just do well with 5 film holders and 19 sheets of film. There's a good chance, that after carefully selecting your choice view, you can get everything in one go with a 4x5 camera on a tripod. There are really inexpensive new and even used 4x5 cameras."

Large format is really a fantasy for me. Very attractive. But then I think, it would never work for this sort of sunrise application. But then I think again how this might be used closer to home where the practicalities and logistics of 4x5 might be manageable.


"I do not know the distance you re from the arch and lady. What was the actual focal length used in a shot taking in the entire arch and the washerwoman?"

The arch is close, about 10-15 feet, whereas the lady might be a mile away. I made an extensive series of pictures that morning, some of them quite similar to the ones that Alain Briot posted as examples. You will notice in Alain's web size photos that it is hard to see detail in the mid distance monuments, due to the low angle of the sun and the atmospheric conditions.

I will try to post a few more from this shoot along with the details about focal length. Perhaps that will stimulate a wider discussion. It might take a few days for me to do this, as I am installing a new computer and my files are not fully accessible at the moment.

"You can get a used a 4x5 Crown Graphic for about $200-250 with a 120-150mm lens. I'd get a feel for the emulsion by shooting 35mm film rocky landscapes cenes with several film types that are available for 4x5. You might need a 90mm lens instead of the standard lens. KEH.com is a good source."

Now you have me thinking about 4x5! It balances my desire for a 5D mark II. The 4x5 would certainly be cheaper for the hardware, though largely impractical for an amateur shooter. How far off in image quality versus 4x5 would I be with a 5D mark II? At what size enlargement would the difference be apparent? How do you manage the processing of 4x5 negs? Right now, the biggest I can print is 13 x 19. The 5D mark I is pretty good at that size. The trade offs seem to favor the dlsr for travel, though the cost of dslr and adequate lenses goes up pretty fast. There is a lot to think about here. I do not see myself selling photographs. So, what do I do with 4x5 negs that cry out to be printed large?

-Nat

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

A sunrise at Mesa Arch

Here are several more photos to complement those posted by Alain Briot. This gives further context to the original post, attempting in some way to do something a little different. The intention of these was to capture the sunrise and explore a number of different compositions. That intention was limited by the fact that 20-30 photographers had taken up their station, planted their tripods and it was not possible to move till some of them had cleared out.

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

One more

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nathaniel,

You have so many winning shots. If you had discovered the arch and lady first, your name would be in all the art and textbooks of the National Parks. They are so enjoyable! What's the name of the second figure? Looks like Moses with the two tablets of stone!

From what you have shown it is difficult to position oneself so that the Washerwoman is made to stand against the sky. It seems if one goes to the left, other rock will block the view altogether. One needs a friend to light a massive arc lamp behind her!

I think you have done an excellent job. I need to reread your previous post to say more.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nathaniel,

Maybe adding details to the Washer Woman with a telephoto lens is not so far fetched. Here's a picture from the virtual tourist taken with a 300mm lens.

This is the work of Kimberly Ann Clark and one can look at her pictures here.

Asher

 

[Nathaniel Alpert]

A few more!

Nathaniel,

Maybe adding details to the Washer Woman with a telephoto lens is not so far fetched. Here's a picture from the virtual tourist taken with a 300mm lens.

This is the work of Kimberly Ann Clark and one can look at her pictures

Asher

Asher,

It's the early morning atmospherics that are reducing the local contrast. There is plenty of detail in the originals. Maybe a jpg probelm too.

Here are a few more from that shoot:

1.

2.

3.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Nathaniel,

I'm learning from each new picture. Could you share a crop of the best Washer Woman?

Asher

 

[Winston Mitchell]

Fascinating thread. I have been there once and need to go back. Thanks to all for the great read.

 

[Ron Morse]

While I wouldn't be much help in the critique department, I'm enjoying this series of photographs.

I think I am going to have to pay this place a visit soon. Actually we considered it for this year but decided to go to the Mayan ruins in January instead.

 

[Rene F Granaada]

When landscape is (one of the) subject(s)

Hi Alain, Nathaniel, Asher

I enjoyed all your comments and the picture. Each person will find a different point of view that gives them joy. That's what one should do. This can be a picture postcard, maybe art and perhaps both. However, I'd hope it's the best scene one can imagine.

Asher

Hello everyone, I do find the dilemmas focused on in this discussion particularly interesting, as I encounter the same dilemmas a a photographer that has shot a fair amount of outdoor shoots with a model posed in the setting, which created tension between the lighting on the model and ideal lighting for the landscape and depth of field issues... My wish for visible detail which Alain pointed out creates the need for large prints, I use an Epson 9600, so size is not an issue. Being able to shoot at the time of day one wishes for, and finding the perspective, that we somehow imagine in our minds eye, may take several visits to a particular location, something that is not always possible. And on top of that, especially when nature is either an important backdrop that it becomes a subject in itself, or the only subject of the picture, the dilemma is still where do want the viewer's eye to go, and when do we ask too much of our viewers, thereby taking away from the quality of a photograph by wishing to put too much into a photo....
I have been involved in a discussion on some retouching of an unusual type of outdoor model photograph I did with a fetish model in an outdoor setting:

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7370

In that particular photo that was shot near the house I rented in NM has all the issues in it i believe, that i touched on earlier in my comments..

I do like all the different perspectives from Mesa Arch, the 2. shot of Nathaniel's series is one of my favorites as far as composition goes, color saturation and contrast is a matter of personal taste.....

Rene-Frank