Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Landscape & Nature Photography => Topic started by: churly on November 08, 2012, 08:59:02 pm
-
A few more shots from a series looking at the moods of a river. I posted the first of this set a while ago.
Thanks for looking in.
(http://churly.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v55/p1175082014-4.jpg)
(http://churly.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v53/p1124920760-5.jpg)
(http://churly.zenfolio.com/img/s1/v49/p1124919840-4.jpg)
-
Different images all.
I like, I like a lot.
Tony Jay
-
Yes, very different images but my favourite is #1. The molten metal look of the stream and the good contrast all please my eyes!
-
#1 lovely mono good tonal range, textures and details...the luminosity you've captured in the rocks works very well.
# 2 is all about the your chosen shutter speed...lovely water texture.
3 isn't doing a lot for me.
-
Love #3 but I find #1 tedious to look at because of the seemingly over-sharpening of the rocks.
-
Number one for me kind of hints at being a Jerry Uelsmann shot. I sort of get this feeling the stream is flowing downhill then flowing off into the sky with some rocks imbedded in the sky and then just disappearing into elsewhere. It’s kind of subtlety surreal.
Number two is just all cool smooth never ending motion, with good color and context, something you can get ahold of in your head and what to put yourself in that place and time. A place you would like to go to and spend time there.
Number three is just all buzzy and frenetic motion, and not much else that I can see or feel. Nothing for me to get a hold of and relate to. Not enough context for me to be curious enough to want to be in that place. I’ve spent oh, I’d say an hour looking at this picture, off and on over the last two days, I’ve really tried to make it work for me, but frankly it is just too much work to try and relate to this picture.
Later Larry
-
Different images all.
I like, I like a lot.
+1.
-
Thanks to everyone for the illuminating comments. They are useful and appreciated feedback.
chrisc - this is the first time I have had an image described as 'tedious' and I'm not entirely sure what it means in this context. Anyway, I've gone back and looked at the sharpening and I agree that the rocks in the upper part of #2 have been hit too hard although you don't really see it until the image gets crunched down to this small size.
I understand the polarized response to #3. As Larry points out there is nothing to get a hold of, which is vaguely disturbing, but that is exactly the feeling I want the image to transmit. To me that is just part of the variety carried in flowing water.
-
chrisc - this is the first time I have had an image described as 'tedious' and I'm not entirely sure what it means in this context. Anyway, I've gone back and looked at the sharpening and I agree that the rocks in the upper part of #2 have been hit too hard although you don't really see it until the image gets crunched down to this small size.
Tedious in that I found it tiresome on my eyes (well, metaphorically speaking), to look at that much sharpening.
-
I really liked all the texture in #1. Really cool image.
-
I didn't care for #1, because for me long exposures of water have become a cliche and the rocks were a bit crunchy. But I respected it, technically speaking :)
I loved #2 and #3, especially #2 which achieves a magical combination of stillness and movement.