Maligne Starry Sky
- Widescreen 16:10
- 2560x1600
- 2304x1440
- 2048x1280
- 1920x1200
- 1680x1050
- 1440x900
- 1280x800
- 1152x720
- Widescreen 16:9
- 2560x1440
- 1920x1080 - 1080p HDTV
- 1280x720 - 720p HDTV
- Dual monitors
- 2560x1024
- Fullscreen 4:3
- 1600x1200
- 1400x1050
- 1280x960
- 1024x768
- Fullscreen 5:4
- 1280x1024
- Netbook
- 1024x600
- 800x480
- iPhone
- 320x480
- BlackBerry
- 320x240
- Other
- 480x272
No match
Maligne Lake is a lake in Jasper National Park, Alberta, Canada. It is approximately 22.5 km (14 mi) long and 97 m (318 ft) at its deepest point. The name Maligne is French for "wicked" and was used by Father Pierre-Jean De Smet (1801-1873) to describe the treacherous river that flows from the lake. The name soon spread to the lake, canyon, pass, mountain and range.
About the photo
Adobe Photoshop.
Nikon D300, Sigma 10-20mm.
Related wallpapers
More by Dominic Kamp
Comments (48)
-
Southport
Easily one of the top 5 best wallpapers on this site. The whole picture is like a dream sequence.
-
karx11erx
(apparently comments cannot be edited) Here's a link to what I consider a very well done application of HDR: http://interfacelift.com/wallpaper_beta/details/1713/mystic_sunset.html
-
karx11erx
Well, I have read your comments on your image, and yet I have to say that it appears unnatural and overprocessed. Maybe this is simply due to the fact that I compare it to what I can perceive and what scenes I have seen at night, but this image presents a view on nature that has been taken by sensors that on the one side are superior (low light) and on the other side are inferior (contrast) to the human eye. Here are a few pointers. The sky looks too monotonous, no shades, no (even slight) detail. The stars are overly bright and very crisp. Your correcting the longer traces of starlight due to the shot's long light exposure makes this look even more unnatural. The clouds look like they have been added to the image as an extra layer. Stars shining through them so brightly increases that impression. The mountain in the background looks strangely flat due to the complete lack of any blur and its extremely sharp edges. The lake just mirrors these impressions with its supernatural flat reflection. The entire image is just too clear and clean. For me this is a classical case of going over the top with technical capabilities and HDR. It seems to be very easy and tempting to take HDR effects too far. Some perfect visual sensors may perceive the world like shown on your picture, but the human eye does not, and hence it appear unnatural and in a subtle way "wrong".
-
Faeth
Your wallpapers are amazing and I don't know why everyone keeps crying "Fake!" when this picture is clearly marked as a digital composition. This has been on my desktop and phone since it was uploaded and is one of my favorite wallpapers of all time. Thank you for your work Macindows.
-
Clyde, thanks for pointing that out! In general you're right. But since I leave my house every now and then, what happens, if the clouds are thin and therefore, have a low opacity and on top, are moving fast? In that case, the stars would be slightly shining through, as it can be seen on my wallpaper and on the following real photo! ;-) http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/3909/originalx.png
-
Clyde
Macindows..do you have a version without the stars ? *For those that never go out EVER, stars do not usually appear in front of clouds :)
-
freakalicious
It's really beautiful but I agree it looks kinda fake. The exposure should be one of the reasons. Also, shouldn't the reflection image be dimmer/blurer when it goes "further"?
-
This is awesome, what were the Exposure settings you used to capture the different compositions?
-
antonis7
oh my... dude i have never commented on IFL before but this is a stunning composition keep up the good work macindows
-
josephwm
Macindows, I think the seam of the mountains to the sky perhaps gives it the fake look people are talking about. I think they are too much in focus compared to the sky behind them... It is still a very nice shot however, and I love the stars.
-
Just for clarification: The picture is based on the following image. Everything else has been added. http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/1499/originalb.png
-
The long exposure from the original photo has blurred the clouds, but since the stars have been added later, it gives away the digital processing. And that is to the eye of the experienced photographer. None the less, I think the work here deserves a lot of credits because of the high quality of the end result and for the amount of time spent on it. I do prefer an original photo myself, but I don't have to like a digital composition to appreciate the effort!
-
den4ps
EDIT - i found your flickr link in your profile.
-
den4ps
this is a great picture. it's funny to hear some people doubt the authenticity when they are not familiar with how cameras gather light and things blur over long exposure. i think it's a great composite and looks stunning on my 24" ACD. great job. i would be interested in adding you as a flickr contact if you have an account. i think your original HDR in the daytime with the pier in the middle also looks great. just because the human eye does not see something a certain way doesn't mean it's not really there.
-
MacPro
Image looks fake, not quite my cup of tea. I do agree with other users that the original image most likely would be better without all the editing.
-
Geosim
If I could compare Macindows with a movie director, it would be Michael Bay, if not for anything but his ability to go all out in his composition to blow the viewer away (although perhaps Macindows deserves more artistic credit than that ;). Does this style occasionally lead to some questionable decisions when it comes to post processing? Undoubtedly. But is it wrong? Of course not. Does it produce results? One look through Macindow's portfolio on this site would suggest it does. If I were to be hypercritical of this image, it would be that there is too much light. Now, that may well have been how it appeared to the naked eye, especially if it was taken not long after dusk or the moon was particularly bright that evening, but not having been there at the time (though I wish I was), I can't say for sure. However, I trust from your explanation you've gone to great lengths to ensure it's as realistic as possible, but whenever I see a nighttime landscape, I expect to see silhouettes and not be able to make out fine details of the landscape, as I wouldn't be able to if I was standing there at night. That doesn't mean to say it's a bad image, indeed it makes an interesting change from the usual starscapes we see, but, to me at least, that is what gives this image a certain 'unrealistic', or (to put a positive spin on it) ethereal quality, even if that's not what you were going for. Personally, I would have liked to see this scene with a longer exposure of the sky to produce some nice star trails, not necessarily as a replacement, but in addition to this image. It may give it a more realistic look, but would also take away the feeling of standing on the shore of the lake at that moment in time. You certainly have a talent for creating images that are pleasing on the eye, even if they deviate from the often strict guidelines people place on how you get there, and how things should look. I think people don't like being fooled, which explains the occasional hint of animosity towards your submissions when they discover it is, at least in part, a fabrication, although that is only a testament to the quality of that fabrication that they couldn't see it in the first place. Anyway, I digress. As always, I look forward to seeing more of your work on my desktop, and would like to wish you a very Merry Christmas.
-
kailIFL
Stunning work Dominic.
-
Merry Christmas to everybody!
-
Thomatis
@ macindows "I'm having difficulties to understand why you think this image looks fake," Maybe the stars between the clouds & the camera lens for a start.!
-
Clyde
This makes a really good wallpaper. The composition is great but I could do without the stick on un-realistic stars. They look like an after thought.