The valley at Jasper, Ar Framed

[shutterpup]

We had pulled into a Scenic Pullout; everyone was looking out over the valley. I looked down at my feet to see this hole that serves for water runoff. Immediately some of Art Wolfe's naturally framed photos came to mind, and I tried this one. How'd I do?
[attachment=14469:Lorraine...Photo_28.jpg]

[Ed Blagden]

Not great to be brutally honest.  Camera not straight, the stone "frame" not symmetrical (both of these can maybe be fixed by cropping), there is a piece of litter in the foreground which you could have gotten rid of, and the stone frame plus the bushed in front make a confusing foreground.  The stone frame or the bush would have made an OK foreground, but to have both in the photo is just messy.  The bare branches on the right are a distraction, and the picture was taken at the wrong tie of day (flat boring light).  No amount of post processing is going to make this photo OK.

Keep trying... if you want a little advice it is this: when you see a landscape you want to photograph, take some time before you put the camera to your eye to study the scene.  Think very carefully about what elements of the landscape scene you find visually arresting, and then when you finally put the camera to your eye try and compose the shot so that only those elements are present, and nothing else.  All the other stuff can be eliminated, either by positioning yourself or (as in the offending piece of litter) physically moving things away from the scene.

[wolfnowl]

Basically, yeah.  What Ed said is all good.  Try again!

Mike.

[shutterpup]

Basically, yeah.  What Ed said is all good.  Try again!

Mike.

I shall keep trying.

[AndrewKulin]

One other thing - it appears your sensor is dirty - based on the round darker blobs visible in the sky - particularly visible between the two dead branches at the top right, but elsewhere too in the sky.

Andrew

[shutterpup]

One other thing - it appears your sensor is dirty - based on the round darker blobs visible in the sky - particularly visible between the two dead branches at the top right, but elsewhere too in the sky.

Andrew

I saw that too and didn't know what it was. Thanks.

[shutterpup]

Not great to be brutally honest.  Camera not straight, the stone "frame" not symmetrical (both of these can maybe be fixed by cropping), there is a piece of litter in the foreground which you could have gotten rid of, and the stone frame plus the bushed in front make a confusing foreground.  The stone frame or the bush would have made an OK foreground, but to have both in the photo is just messy.  The bare branches on the right are a distraction, and the picture was taken at the wrong tie of day (flat boring light).  No amount of post processing is going to make this photo OK.

Keep trying... if you want a little advice it is this: when you see a landscape you want to photograph, take some time before you put the camera to your eye to study the scene.  Think very carefully about what elements of the landscape scene you find visually arresting, and then when you finally put the camera to your eye try and compose the shot so that only those elements are present, and nothing else.  All the other stuff can be eliminated, either by positioning yourself or (as in the offending piece of litter) physically moving things away from the scene.

I was with folks that day who wanted me to "hurry up and shoot." I like what you've said about thinking about the elements that caught my attention to begin with and then making sure those elements are the only ones in the photo. When I reviewed my shot, I could see the messiness. I've only been shooting for a year and this is the first forum where I've received any kind of meaningful feedback on my efforts. For that I thank everyone here who bothers to provide feedback.

[RSL]

Pup, Clean your sensor and keep on shooting. If you don't have a good reference to sensor cleaning info, here's a good one: http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/methods.html.

[shutterpup]

Pup, Clean your sensor and keep on shooting. If you don't have a good reference to sensor cleaning info, here's a good one: http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/methods.html.

Russ,
Thanks for the link and the encouragement.

[wolfnowl]

When I was starting out as a photographer I worked in the camera department of a retail store.  Mostly we sold pocket cameras, Polaroids, that sort of thing.  There was a clerk I worked with there who worked full-time for the Armed Forces as a photo technician.  When I would hand him a stack of prints he would go through them so fast one would think he'd hardly had time to glance at them.  This is true, because if an image doesn't present something of interest to you in the first 1/2 second or so on a subliminal level, it's time to cut and move on.  Once you've been grabbed you can analyze - okay, the composition is good, the lighting is right, the tones or the colours or whatever work together here, there are strong lines or converging elements or whatever... that comes later.  But first it needs to have something of interest to say.  My $0.02.

Mike.

P.S.  I rarely bring a camera when I'm out with other people.  You can hike or you can make photographs, but it's very hard to do both (tourist shots of your friends don't count).

[shutterpup]

When I was starting out as a photographer I worked in the camera department of a retail store.  Mostly we sold pocket cameras, Polaroids, that sort of thing.  There was a clerk I worked with there who worked full-time for the Armed Forces as a photo technician.  When I would hand him a stack of prints he would go through them so fast one would think he'd hardly had time to glance at them.  This is true, because if an image doesn't present something of interest to you in the first 1/2 second or so on a subliminal level, it's time to cut and move on.  Once you've been grabbed you can analyze - okay, the composition is good, the lighting is right, the tones or the colours or whatever work together here, there are strong lines or converging elements or whatever... that comes later.  But first it needs to have something of interest to say.  My $0.02.

Mike.

P.S.  I rarely bring a camera when I'm out with other people.  You can hike or you can make photographs, but it's very hard to do both (tourist shots of your friends don't count).

Mike,
I found the whole experience on this trip frustrating. My husband and I both had our cameras, and he had thought it would provide photo op's for both of us. His sister would look around, and say "Oh, there's a good picture over there;" IMO she should buy herself a camera and find out what picture taking is about.

I can't agree with you more about a photo having to have something of interest to say, and the fact that it's first glance impression is everything. This is the way I view photos of other people's work myself. I've been developing that way of taking a quick look at my own photos as well. I think we become almost married to the memory of the circumstance of the inspiration that caused us to take the original shot, and we don't see our own work as clearly. That's why I appreciate this site so much. It makes me think and go back and re-evaluate what I hold dear.