Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Blair McDougall on June 30, 2010, 11:14:53 am
-
These are a couple of images I shot on the last full moon.
This is just a simple moon rise shot with some blowing grass in the foreground.
[attachment=22875:_GBT2516_F_copy.jpg]
As I was setting this up I saw that a seagull was flying through my frame so I tried to catch it to give some movement.
[attachment=22874:_GBT2522_copy.jpg]
If you would like more images from this year on the island please visit
My Gallery (http://fogoworkshops.smugmug.com/Fogo-Island/Workshops-2010/12480198_SnQN9#894424402_GaENM)
-
Blair,
Good work. The first one is a fine piece of surrealism. The second is a pleasant tourist shot.
-
My vote goes to the first image. It's simple, elegant and very strong. The second one is nice but to me, it's not as special.
-
Blair,
Good work. The first one is a fine piece of surrealism. The second is a pleasant tourist shot.
I like the first image as well but I don't see it as surrealism. Why do you, Russ?
Jeremy
-
I think it's the effect of the untidy window cord. It hints at a world seen but not seen; inner lives and outer pretences. Look at some more HC-B images and you find a simliar sort of ethic: men looking through holes in fences; little people hurrying happily down the street clutching wine bottles, the contents of which they probably won't know at that age but which might later force them into states of euphoria and even unexpected marriages; gentlemen frozen for ever in mid-leap across puddles that never splash - you get the idea. Alternatively, Bad Moon Rising could even remind one of Credence Clearwater Revival which, obviously it has me.
It all depends on what you choose to bring to your inner party.
Of course, Russ might disagree, but that wouldn't be surreal; it would be illuminating!
; - )
Rob C
-
Like the first one.
Was out trying to catch a a full moon rising the other night, but had problems predicting where it was coming up on the horizon exactly so i could work out a good vantage point etc.
I do remember I saw somewhere there was an app or webvsite that gave not only the rising times but the longitude and latitude in relation to my position.
any ideas. I know roughly where, (east when in scotland at this time of year) as Im hoping to catch the next one (if theres no cloud).
ta
iain
-
Like the first one.
Was out trying to catch a a full moon rising the other night, but had problems predicting where it was coming up on the horizon exactly so i could work out a good vantage point etc.
I do remember I saw somewhere there was an app or webvsite that gave not only the rising times but the longitude and latitude in relation to my position.
any ideas. I know roughly where, (east when in scotland at this time of year) as Im hoping to catch the next one (if theres no cloud).
ta
iain
Try a yacht chandler. Marine tables etc. list all manner of goodies.
Rob C
EDIT: it just occurred to me that if you caught it through clouds, then that would be pretty surreal in itself - go for it!
-
Thanks Rob, ill try that. Im sure i saw it on a web site somewhere but ive searched and searched.
Ive got a stone circle that i would like to picture with the rising.
Iain
-
Blair,
Good work. The first one is a fine piece of surrealism. The second is a pleasant tourist shot.
Thank-you. It was one of those nights where you have a spectacular sunset and an equally wonderful moon rise at the same time. I had been planning that night for months and the weather was perfect.
On the second image I was trying to get the seagull to blur in the frame, but I guess it was too far away for the right effect.
-
Like the first one.
Was out trying to catch a a full moon rising the other night, but had problems predicting where it was coming up on the horizon exactly so i could work out a good vantage point etc.
I do remember I saw somewhere there was an app or webvsite that gave not only the rising times but the longitude and latitude in relation to my position.
any ideas. I know roughly where, (east when in scotland at this time of year) as Im hoping to catch the next one (if theres no cloud).
ta
iain
Thanks..I kind of like the first one a little more as well....If you get or have an iphone there is a great little app that is called "Planets" and will give you all the information you would need..I live by it.
-
I like the first as well. Maybe crop a bit of the grass off the bottom. I think the reflection in the window does add a touch of surrealism.
Here are the problems I have with the second: no detail in the moon, the bird is a distraction looking more like gunk on the sensor; the tangency of the bow of the boat to the frame leads me out of the image.
-
Thanks Rob, ill try that. Im sure i saw it on a web site somewhere but ive searched and searched.
Ive got a stone circle that i would like to picture with the rising.
Iain
Using Google Earth, you can place a virtual camera anywhere in the world, and see the position of the sun and the moon at any point in time: an example (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=40302&view=findpost&p=334933).
-
Thanks EduPerez
I remember now. Ill try it out. I dumped google earth when cleaning out my hard drive and forgot to reinstall! doh!
-
I like the first image as well but I don't see it as surrealism. Why do you, Russ?
Jeremy
Jeremy, I was going to have a hard time answering that question, and I think Rob came up with a more complete answer than I'd have been able to come up with. To add to his answer, the face of the "man in the moon" is clearly visible. The face next to the strong, red vertical, above grass blowing in the wind introduces a feeling of unreality, yet... it's obviously real. The elements of the picture contradict each other, yet they create a completeness. I don't think what I just said makes sense, but that's what happens when you try to describe surreal things.
-
Jeremy, I was going to have a hard time answering that question, and I think Rob came up with a more complete answer than I'd have been able to come up with. To add to his answer, the face of the "man in the moon" is clearly visible. The face next to the strong, red vertical, above grass blowing in the wind introduces a feeling of unreality, yet... it's obviously real. The elements of the picture contradict each other, yet they create a completeness. I don't think what I just said makes sense, but that's what happens when you try to describe surreal things.
Makes perfect sense to me, Russ.
I agree with the general consensus that #1 is much better than #2.
Ed
-
I love the first image for its textures and interesting shapes in the composition. If you block out the moon with your thumb,the image loses a sense of balance and interest. The positioning of it with the insensity of its colour and luminosity really makes this an interesting image.
The second one for me is like a wannabe. It seems to be struggling too hard to make an interesting shot of the moon and the surrounding buildings. I would scrap it.
Julie
-
Jeremy, I was going to have a hard time answering that question, and I think Rob came up with a more complete answer than I'd have been able to come up with. To add to his answer, the face of the "man in the moon" is clearly visible. The face next to the strong, red vertical, above grass blowing in the wind introduces a feeling of unreality, yet... it's obviously real. The elements of the picture contradict each other, yet they create a completeness. I don't think what I just said makes sense, but that's what happens when you try to describe surreal things.
Thanks, Russ. I'm not sure that I can see the surreality myself but I understand what you are saying.
Jeremy
-
I love the first image for its textures and interesting shapes in the composition. If you block out the moon with your thumb,the image loses a sense of balance and interest. The positioning of it with the insensity of its colour and luminosity really makes this an interesting image.
The second one for me is like a wannabe. It seems to be struggling too hard to make an interesting shot of the moon and the surrounding buildings. I would scrap it.
Julie
Thanks for the input Julie. The second one certainly has it's problems so I'm planning on trying a different approach for the next chance I get to re-shoot this.
Blair
-
Thanks for the input Julie. The second one certainly has it's problems so I'm planning on trying a different approach for the next chance I get to re-shoot this.
Blair
Obviously, your mind is different, but is it wise ever to re-shoot the same static subject? You can't really hope to catch the emotion a second time - the buzz is there when the vision is fresh. Lose that and you may attain improvement, technical perfection but not soul. Without which...
Rob C
-
Obviously, your mind is different, but is it wise ever to re-shoot the same static subject? You can't really hope to catch the emotion a second time - the buzz is there when the vision is fresh. Lose that and you may attain improvement, technical perfection but not soul. Without which...
Rob C
I've thought very carefully about what you have said in your comment. It is a perpetual battle, at least for me, to balance technical improvement with my personal vision (left brain, right brain kind of thing). IMHO both are an integral part of being a photographer although these can eclipse each other from time to time . I totally understand what you mean when you say -the buzz- when you first see that particular scene, but without growth from both sides, especially tech in my case, I can feel stagnant. I realize that emotion is raw and basic but one needs the ability to share it through a print to make it successful. To me technical ability is simply a tool to better express myself, my story, my awe, or all of the above to make it mine.
In the image being discussed (#2) there are elements that carry through to other works of mine that worked, that being said, this one did not work as well as I had hoped. My main constraints were timing and lack of technique (having not shot many moon shots) and yes, the comp. There are valid comments on why this didn't work to which I agree.
There are locations that I have waited years for the right set of ingredients before I even make my first attempt at capturing them even though I may see them on a regular basis, this being one. Usually it works out but not always. The initial feeling was never lost just logged somewhere until I felt the time was right. I have no qualms about re-shooting (given the opportunity) if I think there is a chance that I can better capture the feeling and will wait until I get another chance. In the meantime I just keep trying to improve and work on other stuff until that opportunity arises. That's the beauty of static objects, you sometimes get that second chance to look at it with the same initial emotion and with a few more tools in your "kit".
Blair
This Summer's Gallery (http://fogoworkshops.smugmug.com/Fogo-Island/Workshops-2010/12480198_SnQN9#894424402_GaENM)
-
Obviously, your mind is different, but is it wise ever to re-shoot the same static subject? You can't really hope to catch the emotion a second time - the buzz is there when the vision is fresh. Lose that and you may attain improvement, technical perfection but not soul. Without which...
Rob C
I could not agree more: every time I have tried to go back somewhere, to redo a photograph and correct some technical mistakes, I find that the magic of the moment is completely lost, and end up with a far worse photograph; now I try to learn from my mistakes, and just move on to the next picture.
-
Hoping not to offend anyone's sensibility concerning "Truth in Photography", but if you want to try a bird in your picture why not add one via Photoshop? Blur it to induce a sense of motion.
Thanks,
Dale
-
Hi Dale,
It's not so much about "truth" as it is about being receptive to your environment and making on-the spot decisions as to where you want the shoot to go . For me I am always looking for different ways to shoot something whether it the angle ,light or incorporating more dynamic elements in a static frame. It's fun... Despite the outcome of this image, it's a learning process and always appreciate the feed-back.
As far as adding a bird with Photoshop it's not my style to add elements to my images. I do take things out though. Like that piece of litter in the foreground that you didn't see or dust on the sensor and even out of focus birds in the shot. Don't get me wrong, I love to throw plug-in technology at some images to see what sticks but I don't add things or do composites ( I'm not skilled enough).
Blair