photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Type your message and click Add Comment
It is best to login or register first but you may post as a guest.
Enter an optional name and contact email address. Name
Name Email
help private comment
Phil Douglis | all galleries >> Galleries >> Gallery One: Travel Abstractions -- Unlimited Thought > Merced Abstract Revisited, Yosemite National Park, California, 2004
previous | next
15-OCT-2004

Merced Abstract Revisited, Yosemite National Park, California, 2004

The power of Photoshop as a tool of enhancement and reinterpretation in expressive photography is limited only by our imaginations. I posted my original version of this abstraction of Yosemite National Park’s Merced River embracing the shimmering reflection of El Capitan, in the fall of 2004. Since that time, the original image has triggered the imaginations of many pbase artists. You can see this image, and read the continuing commentary, along with my responses, on the previous page of this gallery.

A number of viewers have asked me to what extent I altered the original colors of this image with Photoshop. I have always answered that question by saying that I honored the original as it came out of the camera, with only minimal adjustments. Yet as time passed, I began to wonder how I might have altered the meaning of this abstraction by significantly intensifying the colors reflected in the waters of the Merced.

In the spring of 2005, I decided to put the original through Photoshop once more, only this time intensifying the colors to present a more vivid portrait of El Capitan’s reflection in the rippled waters of the Merced River. I used Curves, Saturation, and the Shadow/Highlight Control to bring to El Capitan to life within the water.

This image is the result. The colors are now warmer, richer, and the image holds more detail as well. However, I do not consider it to be either an improvement or a regression. It is still very much an abstract vision of a monumental scene. Yet it is a completely different expression than the one on the preceding page. Each of these two images will be perceived according to the imaginations of each viewer. Like the original version, this photograph has its roots in reality and its substance in fantasy. I present it to you here as a lesson in using the power of Photoshop to reinterpret our original expression in any way we wish.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20
1/125s f/4.0 at 23.3mm iso80 full exif

other sizes: small medium large original auto
share
Phil Douglis27-Apr-2018 03:06
Thanks, Merri, for awakening a long dormant thread of commentary on this image. As you note, we now have plenty of hindsight to chew on regarding digital enhancement of images. A full twelve years has passed since the last comment on my transformation of this image via Photoshop.

You are right -- my enhancement of the original has created an entirely new meaning.The Merced is now a river of gold, and the abstracted reflection of the famed El Capitan adds a new layer of legend to one of Yosemite's iconic features. One of the photographers who participated in this dialogue, Alister Benn, has gone on to build a noteworthy career as a photographic workshop leader. He and I would both agree that post-processing expressive images with Photoshop is not only now considered legitimate -- it really has become essential, giving us a second chance to enhance what the camera has already registered. The important point to keep in mind is the usage involved. If we intend this image as artistic expression, enhancement is not only legitimate -- it is often essential. However if we are using an image as documentation or journalism, such enhancement is unethical. In this case, my enhancement is completely valid -- it is a personal expression, not reportage or a document. As you say, we can liken it to a beautiful painting. It is a fiction, not a fact.
Merri 25-Apr-2018 06:16
These comments are interesting to read in the hindsight of time particularly now digital image manipulation is much more common, ie "digital darkroom". In any case, I think you created something entirely new from the original version (as lovely as it was). This is no longer a photograph, it is a beautiful painting.
Phil Douglis19-May-2006 19:02
I am delighted to know that I've changed the way you look at the role of Photoshop as a force in photographic expression. It is, as you have come to see, an extension of the artistic process. Actually of the expressive process. Just as the darkroom was in film photography, only infinitely more useful. If Ansel Adams were still around, he would be using it with profoundly impressive results.
JSWaters19-May-2006 16:43
I find the interaction between you and Alister the perfect resolution to what so called purists would say to using Photoshop. It wasn't too long ago (days, weeks) that I felt it an artistic untruth to use PS to alter an image - until you enlightened me, that is. It really is an extension of the artistic process that allows the artist to present a more coherent and thought provoking image.
Phil Douglis21-Aug-2005 19:47
Thanks, Lisbeth and Jude, for coming to this image and leaving opposite opinions. I posted this version, as I noted, not as an improvement, but as simply another way to interpret the same image using Photoshop. I happen to like both versions, each for different reasons. And yes, Lisbeth -- when we look at the same image "wearing two different outfits" so to speak, we tend to make judgments based on comparison, rather than on the values of each image seen individually. The more we look at this image for its own values, the more we will see. (Notice how Cory keeps changing his opinion on this one as he comes back to it again and again. In the process of re-examination, he is looking more at what this image itself has to offer him, rather than in comparison to the previous image.) And Jude, you are looking at this image through the eyes of a colorist, so the context you bring to this image is deeply personal, and reflects as much about you as it does the image itself. I am happy that you both are coming to this image from different perspectives, proving my point that abstract images such as this appeal directly to the imagination. Since each viewer's imagination is bound to differ in its workings, an image such as this one will always be seen in entirely different ways.
Jude Marion21-Aug-2005 15:18
Phil, I haven't read others comments, so apologies if I am repeating here....
I like the 2nd image. I'm a colourist and love the additional hues that you've captured here. The 1st image is stunning, but I think 'flat' by comparison. The addtional yellows and reds add such warmth to this abstraction.
This one works for me.
I am quite taken with the bent reflection of the 3rd (from left) stick ... it adds a visual puzzle.
Lisbeth Landstrøm12-Aug-2005 20:18
My immediate thoughts - before getting otherwise inspired :-): Compared to the original image this image for me seems more metallic. The feeling of depth is lost; the organic coherence in the "water-landscape" is lost, the colors seems individualized and are drifting apart. The sticks and their reflections have merged with the rest of the watersurface. I guess this must be my reaction - havíng just had such a good experience studying the original image, and not being able to repeat exactly the same here. I must come back another time and look at it as if it was a "new" photo. Right now I see a beatiful spot on earth, where I would like to see more. Call that greed!
Phil Douglis06-Aug-2005 18:51
Thanks, Harl, for using my images as a photoshop exercise. It is my pleasure to offer it to you. I thank you also for respecting my copyright -- all of my images are posted as learning resources, and should be used in that context only. As you can see from the discussion on this image in both of its forms, it has certainly lived up to my expectations. There are no right or wrong ways to create, edit, or present an abstract image. I respect your vision, and I am sure you respect mine. Feel free to play with it in any way you want and learn whatever you can from the process, Harl.
Guest 06-Aug-2005 17:13
Two things - that is half not have.

And looking at my message, it implies that I might have "stole" your image and I will be hanging it on my wall. That is not the case, I did not keep the image that I copied, I just did it as an learning exersise. I just wanted to be clear.

Thanks again for all that you are providing here to help fellow photographers out.
Guest 06-Aug-2005 17:06
I choose to be even less heavy handed with the post process. I copied both your images int PSP 9, (sorry could not afford the "gold standard" program), and I used your newly retouched version as a layer over the original, and changed the opacity to about 58%. It adds just that touch of color that was missing from the original, and yet keeps the look of the original. If it generates have the conversations hanging on the living room wall as it has here in your gallery...

I just learned of your lessons here on pbase, by following a link to the new magazine, and reading about it there. I want to say thank-you for freely sharing your knowlege with us. This is a wonderful thing that you are doing!
Phil Douglis07-Jul-2005 18:15
Thanks, Alister, for seeing what I am trying to accomplish with this remake. I am as convinced as you are that the image as it comes out of the camera is only half an image -- a starting point for expression. The other half of the image is created in the digital darkroom, just as the fine art print had always been created, by people such as Ansel Adams and Jerry Uelsmann in the chemical darkroom. Needless to say, we are obligated to honor the facts of the matter in travel photography, just as a photojournalist honors the facts of a story he or she is covering. But we can still make those facts more understandable, or emphasize some facts over others, such as I do here by intensifying the colors of the surrounding cliffs, and still be true to those facts. Of course, when it comes to fine art photography -- which this image might also respresent -- we are free to interpret the facts in any way we choose to, because the image is essentially our own creation and reflects our own personal feelings. As an artist, I would be free to make images representing all four seasons from this picture, even if the photo was shot in October. My imagination, plus the tools of the digital darkroom, would enable me to do this. Thanks, Alister, for the idea.
alibenn07-Jul-2005 11:53
I'm really glad you've done this Phil, Photoshop is as integral to final images today, as were the darkroom and the alchemy of fluids and chemicals to Ansel Adams and Jerry Uelsmann. We are so fortunate to be expressing ourselves in this era, with the computer power we have at our fingertips.

I see more of Yosemite in this image, the colour I have always associated with the big walls is more represented here. I now see this as a series of four images with the possibility of showing four seasons of the Merced in a Warhol-like collage. By subtely changing the hue and saturation you can show, warm to progressively colder tones.

This is one hell of an image....
Guest 02-Jun-2005 22:44
I have really given myself to this one and with great reason. It was an abstract that spoke to me and I learned a great deal in the process. Thank you for your patience with me on this and all the help you have provided. I have started moving on in the galleries now and will give this one a little bit of rest :)
Phil Douglis02-Jun-2005 22:34
Thanks, Cory for coming back to this image in its new costume, and doing it four times over a seven hour span. I agree that it is now somewhat less haunting than the original, and not quite as dark in the shadowed areas. You initially felt that it was less abstract and because of that, it did not prod your imagination to the same degree as the original. However this is still a very abstract image. The shadows still hide detail, and the shimmering surface of the water still changes the monumental cliffs that surround the river into huge dabs of paint, as if in a watercolor.

After coming back to this image still again, you seem to warm to the more transparent shadows, seeing them as " a curious child would." I was delighted by your concluding comment, Cory -- for you, my subtle enhancements did nothing to change the ultimate value of the image itself, but hopefully made the journey you took through my photograph a bit more adventurous. Thank you for giving so much of yourself to this image and to us.
Phil Douglis02-Jun-2005 22:23
Thanks, Kal, for noting how the intensity of color can change the mood of an image. This is indeed the same process we went through when we edited your "Abstract Elegance" image athttp://www.pbase.com/shangheye/image/44038932 I agree entirely with your statement referring to the needless "purism" that lingers into this digital age. We routinely used to enhance and intensify meaning in the film darkroom, didn't we? What is so different about doing the same thing in our "digital darkroom?" The great debate over how far we are "allowed" to make use of Photoshop to alter an image has paralyzed many photographers, making them fearful of somehow making a "false" statement. I always tell my students that the ultimate usage and purpose of an image should tell us just how far we can go in terms of enhancement or even electronic manipulation. If it is a work of personal art, such as this is, we can do whatever we want. On the other hand, if I was to sell this image to a magazine as a travel or editorial image, I would be obligated to retain the essential facts, and only enhance its appearance, as I have done here.

I thank you also for noting that I although I have intensified the color here and opened the shadows, I have also been careful to avoid "overkill" and kept the essential character of the original. It is, as you say, a delicate treatment that does not rely on heavy-handed electronic enhancement.
Guest 02-Jun-2005 21:23
This one has grown on me I must admit. I think the bottom line is this is just a great image with subtle photoshoping or without. One thing I know is that someday I must visit Yosemite National Park.
Guest 02-Jun-2005 15:46
Even though I keep leaving this image I seem to still be thinking about it in the backround. I am thinking that your exercise in photoshop may have revealed to me what I was trying to find. The shadows I think were one of the elements of abstraction and while my first response was to run from them I think they were also what left me like a curious child (borrowing slightly from Zandra's comment on the "Surfaces, The Guggenheim" image) coming back for another peek.
Guest 02-Jun-2005 15:06
I have already had another thought on this one. I have decided I like the warmer tones but I think if I had redone the image if anything I would have deepened the shadows rather than reveal more detail. I think that would be a good contrast to the warm tones which are inviting while the shadows remain unknown and haunting.
Guest 02-Jun-2005 14:47
The warmer tones and lightened shadows make this a far less haunting image. I cannot help but feel that by revealing more detail the image does not spark my imagination as much. I think the hidden and unknown aspects of the original were a large portion of its power. I still like this image in its own way but it does not provoke my imagination to try and reveal what "was hidden". This is just my first interpretation and certainly is likely to evolve on further visits.
Kal Khogali02-Jun-2005 06:21
A wonderful example, Phil, of how colour, contrast and hue, can alter the mood of an image. In each of these two images the subject and form is the same, but intensity has changed the mood. This reminds me so much of your work on my image "Abstract Elegence", and the impact it had not only the message, but how clearly that message got through. There is a tendency, I think, in this modern age of digital technology, for some puritans to become obsessed with the fact that what came out of the camera is what should count. They forget that before digital we had different film types, different developers, and contrast papers. We can all overkill an image with PS (I am sooo guilty of that sometimes), but here, the delecacy of your treatment comes through in the unprocessed mood of this redefined picture.
Type your message and click Add Comment
It is best to login or register first but you may post as a guest.
Enter an optional name and contact email address. Name
Name Email
help private comment