Topic: High tide (Read 3751 times)

MattNQ · « **on:** June 04, 2013, 09:21:19 pm »

I have a few variations on this - mainly the water doing different things, but interested to hear if the composition works for you

rogerxnz · « **Reply #1 on:** June 04, 2013, 11:45:32 pm »

I find coastal shots like this difficult without, usually, anything on the right side of the image to balance or counter the mass on the left.

In your case, it helps that there is a small but dark land mass at the horizon and a rock in the water, both at the right edge.

Of more concern to me is the lack of absolute whites and blacks anywhere in the image. Even the bright spots in the sky are gray. To me, the tone of the image is too dull, flat and uninteresting.
Roger

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #2 on:** June 04, 2013, 11:55:45 pm »

It works for me. I like the way clouds, waves, and cliffs all show strong directional lines, converging in the center.

Eric M.

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #3 on:** June 05, 2013, 03:37:55 am »

The composition works, but the processing doesn't. It's awfully flat and lacking in contrast. I suspect it could be improved without too much trouble, though.

Jeremy

Tony Jay · « **Reply #4 on:** June 05, 2013, 05:21:11 am »

I like your composition Matt.
I'm not sure, however, what to make of the processing - a bit unrealistic for my tastes.

Tony Jay

David Eckels · « **Reply #5 on:** June 05, 2013, 08:00:51 am »

I love the motion in this, but agree with increasing the contrast some. RE: Tony's comment, I can't tell if it's the PP or the 1/2 sec exposure. I'd keep working with it though, for sure.

MattNQ · « **Reply #6 on:** June 05, 2013, 09:45:31 am »

Thanks all for the feedback.

I had an earlier version that was processed too far. Looks like I went too far back the other way.

I'll aim for something in the middle along these lines - here is a quick edit.

PeterAit · « **Reply #7 on:** June 05, 2013, 10:15:29 am »

Quote from: Tony Jay on June 05, 2013, 05:21:11 am

I like your composition Matt.
I'm not sure, however, what to make of the processing - a bit unrealistic for my tastes.

Tony Jay

I agree. Great subject and composition, but rather over-dramatized and not at all real-looking.

Riaan van Wyk · « **Reply #8 on:** June 05, 2013, 02:39:40 pm »

Matt, I'm not sure about the composition- I get an uneasy feeling about the balance but it might be the processing that I'm not fond of that clouds my judgement.

rogerxnz · « **Reply #9 on:** June 05, 2013, 06:26:17 pm »

Your second version works well for me. Much better!
Roger

MattNQ · « **Reply #10 on:** June 05, 2013, 08:33:53 pm »

Quote from: Isaac on June 05, 2013, 03:08:34 pm

For me, the diagonal movement in the clouds is the straw that pushes the image from "dynamic" to "busy".

My guess is that a blanket of horizontal clouds could work better.

I had considered cropping the clouds - perhaps about 1/2 the sky - may work

Peter McLennan · « **Reply #11 on:** June 05, 2013, 08:43:27 pm »

I like the last version. The RHS rock balances the composition nicely.

I don't think it's over processed. It's moody and thought provoking - an impression, not a record.

David Eckels · « **Reply #12 on:** June 05, 2013, 09:53:22 pm »

Quote from: Peter McLennan on June 05, 2013, 08:43:27 pm

I like the last version. The RHS rock balances the composition nicely.

I don't think it's over processed. It's moody and thought provoking - an impression, not a record.

+1

MattNQ · « **Reply #13 on:** June 06, 2013, 02:20:55 am »

Thanks all for you feedback.

I do tend to push monos more to dark & moody & slightly surreal, rather than simply a clean and well balanced record of what's there.
But this can end up being a matter of personal taste - I fully understand it works for some, but not others.

Colorwave · « **Reply #14 on:** June 06, 2013, 04:00:39 am »

Personally, I think the composition is fantastic and would change little or nothing about it. If anything, perhaps a little burning in of the lower left corner to help push the eye back around and not let it drift out of the corner.

I greatly prefer the first version, though, as the second looks overbaked to me. Somewhere just slightly toward the second one, but much much closer to the first would be my personal sweet spot, and I think that this would make a stunningly dramatic large print.

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #15 on:** June 06, 2013, 04:35:04 am »

Interesting image worth spending time on.

For my taste, the halo at the right edge of the rocks is too obvious. That's the only thing my eye ends up being attracted to.

It says "look, the sky was darkened".

Cheers,
Bernard

Colorwave · « **Reply #16 on:** June 06, 2013, 04:51:41 am »

I missed that, Bernard, but agree with you that it needs some TLC there.

Rob C · « **Reply #17 on:** June 06, 2013, 05:13:15 am »

Basically, a shot that allows a lot of manipulation in several directions. I didn't like the original version at all but do like the second one. I'd try to bring the sky to life, though, and wouldn't worry about being too dramatic: after all, it's about photography, not weather forecasting.

Do what turns you on if your state doesn't forbid it. (That Playboy Philosophy lasts a long time in the memory... almost a religion, one might say.)

Rob C

David Eckels · « **Reply #18 on:** June 06, 2013, 09:54:04 am »

Quote from: Rob C on June 06, 2013, 05:13:15 am

That Playboy Philosophy lasts a long time in the memory... almost a religion, one might say.

Thumbs up, Rob!

Rob C · « **Reply #19 on:** June 06, 2013, 11:19:12 am »

Quote from: David Eckels on June 06, 2013, 09:54:04 am

Thumbs up, Rob!

Well, as the man said, if you don't swing, don't ring! and what more apt for photography?

Rob C

Author Topic: High tide (Read 3751 times)