Topic: need critique please (Read 3301 times)

pcgpcg · « **on:** January 27, 2016, 12:14:46 pm »

I’ve been pondering how to crop this for several weeks. My first inclination was to go with the 2x1 crop for two reasons: this is part of a series and the other two in the series are 2x1 crops. I also like the strong horizontals in the 2x1 crop.

However, the cloud formation visible in the 4x3 crop is quite spectacular. It does change the entire design of the photo though, but I feel the upper arch of the cloud competes with the strong horizontals below. However, that cloud is so spectacular…

I’m torn. I’d like some critical feedback from others on the cropping and composition, or any other aspect that compels you to comment. Thank you.

mbaginy · « **Reply #1 on:** January 27, 2016, 01:17:16 pm »

I prefer the first image (2:1). Can't really say why, Paul, but that crop just works better for me. Maybe the 4:3 crop is too "busy" in the sky or "top heavy".

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #2 on:** January 27, 2016, 01:43:32 pm »

Both.

In the first, the emphasis is on the hills, in the second, on the cloud. So, depending on the context (series, theme, etc.) both could work equally well.

MattBurt · « **Reply #3 on:** January 27, 2016, 02:06:29 pm »

Both good images but being the cloud fan I am I prefer the second. However if I didn't know that nice cloud top was there I'd be perfectly content with the first as well.

Chairman Bill · « **Reply #4 on:** January 27, 2016, 02:10:01 pm »

I'm not going to be of much help. I like both, and agree with Slobodan & Matt.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #5 on:** January 27, 2016, 03:47:25 pm »

Slobodan nailed it.

Zorki5 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 27, 2016, 03:55:38 pm »

To me, second image is so much better that there is no comparison. For two reasons:

1) even though the hills are good, they are still quite ordinary, while the cloud is gorgeous; so it is natural to put emphasis on it.

2) I do not think first image emphasizes hills as Slobodan suggested; rather, both hills and clouds are quite prominent and thus look "equally important". So the all-important question of "what this image is about" is largely left unanswered, while second image is very clearly "about the clouds" (and very spectacular ones...)

RSL · « **Reply #7 on:** January 27, 2016, 04:13:22 pm »

What does it look like with NO crop?

David Eckels · « **Reply #8 on:** January 27, 2016, 04:19:30 pm »

Wow. Interesting how the subject changes entirely with the AR. I like both, but agree with Russ, wait for it, wait for it, that I'd like to see the "NO crop" frame

BobDavid · « **Reply #9 on:** January 27, 2016, 04:41:24 pm »

I like the bottom one. I'm crazy for clouds.

pcgpcg · « **Reply #10 on:** January 27, 2016, 05:38:33 pm »

Thanks everyone for taking the time to pitch in and offer comment. It helps me know my own mind better when I can play it off others.

Quote from: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 27, 2016, 03:47:25 pm

Slobodan nailed it.

I agree. The context is important and makes the difference for me. I guess I just need to make a decision on what context I want to present it in.
I agree that standing alone, there is nothing exemplary about the photo in the 2x1 crop. There is actually nothing really exemplary about the photo as a 4x3 crop either, except that mother nature happened to put a nice unusual cloud there. Maybe it works as a street photo of a landscape? $:-\$ This is what happens when I'm stuck inside during a long, cold and grey rainy winter and I start going through old photos I've passed over before and seeing if I can make something happen. Hope springs eternal.

Quote from: RSL on January 27, 2016, 04:13:22 pm

What does it look like with NO crop?

No crop - after conversion to B&W and some initial processing, but before straightening the horizon, cloning out some brush, and some final processing...

RSL · « **Reply #11 on:** January 27, 2016, 06:46:33 pm »

Ah Ha!!! The best version yet.

Bob_B · « **Reply #12 on:** January 27, 2016, 07:08:59 pm »

Quote from: RSL on January 27, 2016, 06:46:33 pm

Ah Ha!!! The best version yet.

Indeed! Russ nailed it.

Zorki5 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 27, 2016, 07:09:11 pm »

Quote from: RSL on January 27, 2016, 06:46:33 pm

Ah Ha!!! The best version yet.

Yes, most certainly (to my taste, anyway). That dark sky above the cloud adds so much to it...

I'd just crop the image from below a tiny bit, so that the land occupies approximately the same space as the dark portion of the sky.

pcgpcg · « **Reply #14 on:** January 27, 2016, 08:20:35 pm »

Food for thought. I love it when my brain gets jogged like this.

David Eckels · « **Reply #15 on:** January 27, 2016, 08:53:05 pm »

I'm with Russ. Straighten it and you're good to go. Love the B/W rendering.

mbaginy · « **Reply #16 on:** January 28, 2016, 12:18:42 am »

Yes, I prefer the uncropped version to both others. It's by far the best.

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #17 on:** January 28, 2016, 04:26:33 am »

I think both the uncropped version and the first are excellent. I'm not mad on the second one.

Jeremy

RSL · « **Reply #18 on:** January 28, 2016, 08:22:14 am »

People often come a cropper by cropping. Trust your eye. If you've been at it for a while, what you see in the viewfinder at "the decisive moment" usually is the best version.

luxborealis · « **Reply #19 on:** February 06, 2016, 08:16:52 am »

The original is certainly the strongest image. The first images makes everything obvious. The original allows the viewer to look, digest, and enjoy moving into the scene.

If you end up giving the original the same processing as the first two, can I suggest you tone down the foreground with a grad mask. The shaping provided by slightly graduating the foreground will further draw viewers into the photo.

Author Topic: need critique please (Read 3301 times)

mbaginy

mbaginy