Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Timo Löfgren on May 02, 2012, 07:19:14 am
-
.......
-
Another image that you should be proud of…
Bravo
-
I like the concept - but find it a little 'muddy' in the jpeg.
-
I really like this seascape, and I hate seascapes. ;)
-
Wonderful rhythm in the rocks, elaborated by their fractal nature, and echoed by the sky. Deceptively simple but engaging. Thanks for sharing.
Scott
-
Ah! What a lovely repetition of the gentle cloud shapes in the rocks! Given that is the essence of this picture (at least for me, of course), I do not mind the slight "muddiness" Josh noticed, as it helps the shapes to stand out.
-
Ah! What a lovely repetition of the gentle cloud shapes in the rocks! Given that is the essence of this picture (at least for me, of course), I do not mind the slight "muddiness" Josh noticed, as it helps the shapes to stand out.
I'm with Slobodan on this.
It's nice to have you back again, Timo!
-
Wonderful image.
Les
-
An intriguing image indeed!
Regards
Tony Jay
-
Nicely done. I saw the 'muddiness' referred to, but I'm sure that in a print it would be much better.
Mike.
-
With my other post (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=66653.0) in mind, here are my points of discussion:
Why is it that you choose not to utilize the full DR in reproduction? Seems some of the intrigue in this image is supposed to be in the darkest tones. Obviously you would want those drawn as best as possible, no?
This image doesn't seem to be balanced well, both in tones as well as composition. I would much prefer the yellow lines to all point slightly downward where the sea would come into the frame slanted as it does now. That way there would be a balance between the right and left side of the composition creating a fishbone pattern.
The top and bottom of the image seem to be separated from the whole. The top is graduated over an impossibly small length and therefore appears very unnatural and unrealistic. As B&W the sunset sky will tend to go from lighter to slightly darker as you come closer to the horizon. Doing a similar change upwards looses depth.
The bottom of the image doesn't seem to contribute anything useful to the composition. It tries to balance the unbalance in the darker right side, but it can't due to lack of contrast. The additional red oval shows another emptiness in the image composition. The lines point towards it, but nothing happens there, if there was it wouldn't be balanced in the frame properly.
The boulder in the front is also slightly too close to the edge. Possibly changing the vantage point so that all the yellow lines point downward could also move that rocky bit to the side of the frame where it could be cropped partly.
-
... here are my points of discussion...
WHAT!!!???
-
With my other post (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=66653.0) in mind, here are my points of discussion:
Why is it that you choose not to utilize the full DR in reproduction? Seems some of the intrigue in this image is supposed to be in the darkest tones. Obviously you would want those drawn as best as possible, no?
This image doesn't seem to be balanced well, both in tones as well as composition. I would much prefer the yellow lines to all point slightly downward where the sea would come into the frame slanted as it does now. That way there would be a balance between the right and left side of the composition creating a fishbone pattern.
The top and bottom of the image seem to be separated from the whole. The top is graduated over an impossibly small length and therefore appears very unnatural and unrealistic. As B&W the sunset sky will tend to go from lighter to slightly darker as you come closer to the horizon. Doing a similar change upwards looses depth.
The bottom of the image doesn't seem to contribute anything useful to the composition. It tries to balance the unbalance in the darker right side, but it can't due to lack of contrast. The additional red oval shows another emptiness in the image composition. The lines point towards it, but nothing happens there, if there was it wouldn't be balanced in the frame properly.
The boulder in the front is also slightly too close to the edge. Possibly changing the vantage point so that all the yellow lines point downward could also move that rocky bit to the side of the frame where it could be cropped partly.
I think I'll sell the camera off! ;D
-
I think I'll sell the camera off! ;D
Now you understand why I believe that all 'critique' is nonsense?
;-)
Rob C
-
What Slobodan said, but I'm glad to see Oscar doing serious critiques. I'm afraid we've all gone too far over to the "nice shot," and "+1" side. I've gotten in the habit of simply not commenting on stuff too blah to notice. None of us should do that.
As usual, Timo has turned in a splendid piece of work.
-
I like this kind of composition and angle in landscape shots.
Furthermore you got a pleasant atmosphere and the black and white is so elegant.
-
I agree with opgr on one point, the bottom of the frame doesn't seem to be pulling its weight. I think the image should end somewhere near the lowest rock. The business with the yellow lines? I'm not seeing it, I don't mind the "empty space" to the left at all, it feels to me like a nice negative space to balance the stone shapes right. I find the high contrast at the horizon line slightly distracting.