Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko  (Read 5263 times)

tsjanik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« on: February 18, 2006, 08:50:32 pm »

I love the cloud.  Unfortunately , there is considerable structure which is not visible on the web.  I should like this image, but somehow find it lacking, but I don't know why.  Any comments/suggestions appreciated.
Logged

jani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
    • Øyet
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2006, 04:17:46 pm »

Perhaps a tighter crop works better, but I also feel that there's something more missing. I'm tempted to blame the subject matter.

[attachment=261:attachment]
Logged
Jan

jule

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 738
    • http://www.juliestephenson.net
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2006, 05:03:20 pm »

Perhaps what is lacking - is what you remember of the location and your experience when you saw the cloud, and it not being portrayed in your image.
I played around with a few crops, and I couldn't get anything to work compositionally very well. I think the idea was good to contrast the brightness of the cloud with the dark, ruggedness of the rocks, but because of the shape of the cloud and the composition, it just can't work.
Great location. Where was it taken?
Logged

Lisa Nikodym

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1705
    • http://www.stanford.edu/~melkor/lisa_pictures/lisa_pictures.html
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2006, 08:40:27 pm »

Perhaps the problem could be solved by application of the classic composition "law of thirds".  Plunking the item of interest near the middle of the frame usually looks awkward.  I would have centered the interesting cloud about 1/3 of the way from the top and 1/3 of the way from the right, with more of the interesting-looking (at least *I* think they are) mountains filling the lower-third/left-third of the frame.  That way, the cloud is the focal point of the image, but not the *only* major thing in the image, which tends to overly trumpet its importance.  (Does this make any sense to people?)

And I'm curious too - where was it?

Lisa
« Last Edit: February 19, 2006, 08:41:04 pm by nniko »
Logged
[url=http://www.stanford.edu/~melkor/lis

tsjanik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2006, 09:02:15 pm »

Jani, Jule:

Thanks for taking the time to comment.  Jani, the crop helps and I have tried that as well, I think the subject matter is fine, but there is no point to the photo other than the cloud, it was a remarkable sight in the desert but loses its impact on paper (Jule, you are on the mark there).  It needed a person or building or something.  It looks great as a B&W print, but I am not tempted to put it on the wall and that’s why I posed the question. Jule, it I was taken in Death Valley around Zabreski point; I have to say I’m happy you didn’t recognize it, since it is almost the photographer’s equivalent of a religious shrine. It was taken with a 90mm lens (67 format); I had a 645 with a 35mm lens as well, but it was too wide.
Logged

tsjanik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
Why doesn't this work? Apol to nniko
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2006, 09:18:27 pm »

Nniko:

You must have posted when I was writing my response. I think you’re right, but I was limited by my lens selection and there were features nearby I did not want in the photo, so I didn’t use the 645 35mm (actually I did but it really didn’t work).

Thanks
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up