Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: dalethorn on March 20, 2009, 10:41:27 am
-
This is one of those rare occasions when I got what I wanted without making alterations. Well, almost. The original had a stronger red glow in the trees, which I can't account for. I don't remember anything red at the original scene besides the bird.
-
Hi,
You may want to add a little more exposure and contrast to this which will give it more punch.
I think this will help add a bit of sparkle to the image.
Cheers,
Simon
-
Hi,
You may want to add a little more exposure and contrast to this which will give it more punch.
I think this will help add a bit of sparkle to the image.
Cheers,
Simon
Here's a slightly zippier version - I don't know if this qualifies as improved, since what I see is mostly just a faster transition between the foreground and the background fog - so less overall fogginess. Unfortunately the small-sensor noise in the sky is more evident with increased contrast.
-
Hi,
You may want to add a little more exposure and contrast to this which will give it more punch.
I think this will help add a bit of sparkle to the image.
Cheers,
Simon
A photo of trees in fog should not have "punch" and "sparkle."
Peter
-
A photo of trees in fog should not have "punch" and "sparkle."
Peter
And especially not "zip." That's already a splendid shot, Dale.
-
And especially not "zip." That's already a splendid shot, Dale.
If I may add some more comments - what I particularly like about this is the sense of depth and distance - the tree at the right is closest, the tree with the bird is a bit farther, the big trees and shrubbery are yet further, and finally the hillside (I think that's what it is) is barely visible. I also think it would be better without the bird - which is dead center, not too interesting, and let's face it, this is not much of a bird photo. But, it's a great trees and fog photo!
Peter
-
If I may add some more comments - what I particularly like about this is the sense of depth and distance - the tree at the right is closest, the tree with the bird is a bit farther, the big trees and shrubbery are yet further, and finally the hillside (I think that's what it is) is barely visible. I also think it would be better without the bird - which is dead center, not too interesting, and let's face it, this is not much of a bird photo. But, it's a great trees and fog photo!
Peter
I think the bird should stay, but I agree, it would be better if the bird were off to one side. The whole thing is a lot like a Japanese woodcut. Very nice.
-
I think the bird should stay, but I agree, it would be better if the bird were off to one side. The whole thing is a lot like a Japanese woodcut. Very nice.
I echo these comments. The image has a nice ethereal quality to it.
JMR