Misty river in mono

[MattNQ]

Misty morning on the Fanning River, Nth Queensland. Too arty do you think??

[popnfresh]

Too arty? I have no idea what you mean. But I do like this a lot.

[MattNQ]

Thanks Popnfresh. I quite like this one myself.
I guess when I say arty, I am just wondering how this comes across - art or a landscape with a bit of strangeness?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

I guess when I say arty, I am just wondering how this comes across - art or a landscape with a bit of strangeness?

I'd say a little of both. But a nice bit of "strangeness."
It doesn't come across as a strictly "accidental" shot, but the fact that it may have been posed to make an expressive point doesn't in any way detract, IMHO. It works for me.

Eric

[RSL]

I think I agree with Eric, but I'd really need to see a larger version before I made an encyclical pronouncement.

[Rob C]

Okay, I'll mess with my own rule and pass a smart-ass opinion about what might have been: for me, I'd have attempted to have the distant prow(?) of the boat pointing a little to the right of the shot, thus creating a sort of arrow effect using the three main lines: the generally descending tree-line, the horizontal water line; and then by angling the boat, its upwards line too, performing a neat Scheimpflug concept of its own!

Then, the people could or could not have been present, and mattered not a jot. Much like my comment, in fact.

;-)

Rob C

[louoates]

My first thought was to think that this might be a stock photo about a couple enjoying the scenery together. My next thought was that I'd get rid of the couple and concentrate on the other strong graphics of the scene. I like the alignment of the canoe pointing at the tree vertically because I really like the way a "+" is formed with the canoe and tree being the vertical and the foggy water the horizontal. Something I haven't seen for a while. In fact I would stress that shape with further processing. RobC's idea on the canoe slanting is also an interesting way to interpret the scene. I'd probably try that one in Photoshop editing.

[Jeremy Roussak]

I think I agree with Eric, but I'd really need to see a larger version before I made an encyclical pronouncement.

An ex cathedra encyclical? A definitively correct opinion is always valuable.

Jeremy

[RSL]

Well, it probably wouldn't be ex cathedra, Jeremy. Ex cathedra is pretty final.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Jeremy,

Russ won't do an encyclical unless the Hand of Man is displayed in a properly reverential manner (and without cropping).   

Eric

[MattNQ]

Thanks all for taking the time to look.
An encyclical? Wow, that is serious. Does he issue them often? How reverential does the hand of man have to be?
Does that then render all other opinions null & void?

The kids were actually kind of accidental (hmm, my wife said that once ...). I was taking a few landscapes with that canoe in frame & lined it up with the tree to try an idea. ...then the kids walked into the shot. So I got them to stand still to see if that added to the shot or not.

Link to a bigger version if you are interested .

http://mattlarsen.smugmug.com/MonochromeMagic/Light-and-Dark/i-24x9rNS/0/X3/P7045013mod1b-X3.jpg

[Rob C]

Matt

It gradually came to me that making things bigger doesn't improve how they look from the geometric point of view. In fact, it has become my habit to make images no larger than about 500 pixels at the longest dimension when I am organizing them prior to working. Somehow, that scale allows me to get the feeling, the dynamic of the shape far more accurately than when the screen is fuller with the shot.  Whether that indicates incipient tunnel vision, along with the other eye problems that seem to be cropping up, I don't know; all I can say is that I feel them better small than larger. A concentrated visual emotion, if you like.

Guess that might have been one of HC-B's reasons too for using a small camera... the geometry is more visible without eye scanning of a screen which forces one to lose sight of different parts. Try composing on an 8x10 if you want to illustrate that for yourself; a 4x5 is bad enough!

Rob C