The distance to Mount Monadnock in NH appears a little more realistic from this spot in Shelburne, MA. A horse is a horse of course, of course. The mountain is the one to the left. I believe in the center is Mount Grace in MA but I didn’t actually ascertain that at the time. Of course 24mm creates a bit more distance but this is close to how it appears to the eye.
Made in October of 2014 and re-edited this morning.
Stephen Gingold Nature Photography Blog 
Gorgeous photo
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you!
LikeLike
I read somewhere that it’s especially beneficial to look into the distance for stimulating creativity. (I’m guessing that it encourages the mind to wander freely.) And I’ve also read that like other visual things, the image doesn’t have to be real – a photograph is ‘real’ enough to trick the mind. So I’m gazing into the (beautiful) distance of your image… 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
🙂 Not everybody will agree with a photograph not having to be real. 🙂 A lot can be said for the distance thing but a lot of creativity happens in small places with tiny things as well. I think the “distance” can be many things.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that’s true – maybe the distance is from everyday life. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those interesting clouds make the image for me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, Lori. WIthout them this is just a humdrum scene…well the foliage is nice and the bare tree. 🙂 Glad that it works for you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beautiful sky, very Hudson School. 🙂 Patten Hill?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Eliza! The Hudson School is always my favorite comparison. Yes or just plain The Patten.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Together the two post show how different a scene looks at 426mm compared to 24mm.
As Photoshop keeps improving, it seems likely that more photographers are going back and re-editing old pictures. Yesterday morning found me doing that with a set of photographs from 2010. I was thankful that I’d move up to a camera with 18 megapixels by then.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve had a few days where I haven’t been getting out so looking at the archives is an option and when I find something to share, whether fresh or a review, it only makes sense to update the processing.
LikeLike
Very nice Steve! Love the clouds! Yes, re-editing older images in the newer Photoshop versions can bring more out from the old files. Plus over the years our editing skills improve or change that helps also! I have used Photoshop since the 1st commercial version in 1990. No layers, no history, just 1 undo! So every time you did something you would save a version with a different file name in case you had to go back. Back back then it seemed amazing to be able to work on your digital files. But most photographers did not shoot digital then.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t get started with Photoshop until v.6 and even then it was a little clunky compared to now. Of course I was a little clunky then too. I was scanning the trannies with a Nikon CoolScan 4000 and some of those files yield good results with the newer tools. Thanks, Reed!
LikeLike
When I clicked on the image and saw it with a dark background, I was surprised by how much more appealing it seemed to me. That isn’t always true; I think white pages can show off images as well as black. But in this case, a photo that didn’t really catch my eye here was made more interesting by the dark background. I don’t think I’d argue for dark over light, or even vice-versa. It’s just another example how how different people respond differently to different presentations of the same image.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am glad that you did that click, Linda. I process my images for internet posting with a black background so I can judge its glow on a display. For printing I do the opposite so the print will not be too dark.Backlit vs. reflective light is very different. I’ve tried framing with a black mat but that isn’t as satisfying. I think it depends a lot on the luminosity of the image too.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s fascinating how different the overall impressions can be depending on a light or dark background. On the computer screen I generally (greatly) prefer black, but I agree that a light mat enhances a printed image. But, as you said in your reply to Linda, it really does depend on the image’s luminosity. And, in this image, the bare tree provides just the right dot for the eye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Gary. A calibrated display that’s not too bright helps as well for judging what a print will look like. I am glad you like the tree. It wa important to me to have it included.
LikeLike
I like 👍🏾 those colours. Stunning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Khürt!
LikeLike