Chris Barker wrote:
> Lovely colours, Moose. I'm still not that keen on the sawtooth effect that
> you get with your mountain ranges, but I wonder if it isn't in fact really
> quite true to life.
>
Oh indeed it is. From my perspective, your "mountains" are really old,
tired and worn down. From the Rockies West, the US mainland has many
relatively young mountain ranges with jagged, sharp looking crests. The
ridge around this double cirque is about as jagged as it looks, with
14,000 ft. peaks, and steeper for a greater height on the back side.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Calif/Sierras/Destination.htm>
We tend to call the soft, rolling heights of many of the coastal ranges
in Calif. hills, where they would be called mountains in some other
places. There are plenty of soft, often really beautiful 'mountains' in
Calif and the West, but they tend to be overshadowed, sometimes
literally, by the latter, younger, more rugged ranges.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Calif/Sierras/Siltrees.htm>
In the particular case at hand, the mountains in question are the
Olympic range on the Olympic Peninsula, in Mike's neck of the woods. Not
particularly tall, relative to other Western ranges, but properly
rugged, with steep slopes, sawtooth ridges, snow caps with several
glaciers. And boy are they wet! They give real meaning to the term
'temperate rain forest'. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Mountains>
> Chris
> (trying not to be wrongly critical)
>
It's OK, I've just dissed your mountains. ;-)
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|