Bone Garden

[Todd Suttles]

Any suggestions on how to emphasize (in PP) the ham bones more than I already have would be appreciated; or maybe it is enough?
Thanks in advance, -t
PS: still feels cluttered to me

[luxborealis]

The clutter is as much from the shadows as it is from the "bones". You want the "bones" so re-shoot on an overcast day to eliminate the shadows. This will allow the bones themselves to provide the shape and texture.

[Todd Suttles]

The clutter is as much from the shadows as it is from the "bones". You want the "bones" so re-shoot on an overcast day to eliminate the shadows. This will allow the bones themselves to provide the shape and texture.

Thanks Terry..
I went back to some shots of this from 2010 that were shot much later in the day. The effect was better but not sure i liked the composition in any of them. I will re-shoot it again soon on an overcast day. I am new at all this so I appreciate your direction to the problem being in capture not PP. Thanks, -t

[luxborealis]

It is, at best, a difficult subject in the first place, as the saplings in front screen the "main point" of the photograph. It may be that less is more. Try getting in close with a wide angle and moving to compose with as few distractions as is humanly possible.

Good luck and keep us informed.

[Michael West]

Any suggestions on how to emphasize (in PP) the ham bones more than I already have would be appreciated; or maybe it is enough?
Thanks in advance, -t
PS: still feels cluttered to me

It took closely peering at the largest display of your image I could manage in my browser to differentiate the bones from  trees.

I might get in closer

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I think the second posted shot works, but I'd crop and go nearer.
Cheers
~Chris

[Jagatai]

I think the black and white, high contrast treatment works better, but I agree that some of the foreground branches are distracting from the main subject.  The suggestion to shoot on an overcast day seems like a good idea.  This is actually a problem I haven't found a good solution to yet.  I often end up shooting trees that get lost in the visual noise surrounding them. 

Cjogo posted a shot under the title Hawaii Golf ( http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=88099.0 ) that successfully separates the trees from the background with the use of fog.  Obviously this doesn't work as well in close up situations (unless the fog is really really thick) but it might be useful to look at how different lighting situations can change foreground/background relationships.

Would it be possible to rig a flag to shadow the background while light still hits the bones?

[brandtb]

Todd - I would ask first, why this tableau? What is really interesting or compelling about all the components in the frame that together makes them special? The things that are interesting are the "ham bones" potentially...the generic stone bench and the trees aren't. Why include them? I would consider getting in tight on what is "interesting"...and for something like this, as was suggested, on an overcast day to eliminate contrast from shadows...and see what develops. /Brandt

[Todd Suttles]

Todd - I would ask first, why this tableau? What is really interesting or compelling about all the components in the frame that together makes them special? The things that are interesting are the "ham bones" potentially...the generic stone bench and the trees aren't. Why include them? I would consider getting in tight on what is "interesting"...and for something like this, as was suggested, on an overcast day to eliminate contrast from shadows...and see what develops. /Brandt

Simple and obvious, now, Brandt. Thanks. I will be re-shooting this one soon. thanks, -t