Kite & Cloud

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Went to a local kite flying festival:


Kite  and Cloud by Slobodan Blagojevic, on Flickr

[Jeremy Roussak]

Fun. It seems to be fleeing. Shame it wasn't a big, menacing black cloud 

Jeremy

[Mjollnir]

I love simple shots like that where the colors do a lot of the talking.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

To get that nice, simple look, Slobodan probably carefully chose a cloud, reshaped it to suit in PhotoShop, selected a kite, rotated the kite and kite string separately to just the right angles, positioned the results on a fine blue sky, and then spent 14 hours doing subtle but effective post-processing in LightRoom and Photoshop.   

I like the result!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Shame it wasn't a big, menacing black cloud 

Hey!... Illinois ain't Scotland!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

To get that nice, simple look, Slobodan probably carefully chose a cloud, reshaped it to suit in PhotoShop, selected a kite, rotated the kite and kite string separately to just the right angles, positioned the results on a fine blue sky, and then spent 14 hours doing subtle but effective post-processing in LightRoom and Photoshop.  

Hahaha!

You got me, Eric! Nothing can pass by your discerning eye!

But, uhm, no!

You see, I am too afraid of Russ, our Yoda, the Great Master of the Lula Order, whose sage advice I tend to follow as much as I can:

"In camera photo you should make."

Yes, I was after that "nice, simple look," as I am often in my photography. The interplay of shapes, colors, forms and lines. Yes, I specifically chose the cloud from among dozen others that day, primarily for its unusual vertical quality. I repositioned myself by walking around the field, looking to avoid multiple kite strings in the way, looking to find a proper angle of polarization, and the angle the sun illuminates the kite. Then I waited. For the sun to reaper from behind those clouds, for the kite to get in the cloud vicinity and at the right angle (they are moving, and fast, you know). Then I waited till the inherent geometries revealed themselves (do I sound here like HCB?) . And when I felt the moment is right (do I sound here like a Viagra commercial?), I pressed the shutter.

In postprocessing, I did crop (gasp!) the lower part, but only to achieve 8x10 ratio and bring the kite into the intersection of thirds. You see, I could only use the central focusing point for precise focusing, thus resulting in a too-central placement of the main point of interest, hence the cropping.

And I adjusted color and contrast a bit. That's it. No repositioning, no compositing, no rotation. Just a good, trained eye, and a sense for inherent geometry  

In retrospective it can be shown that the cloud angle and the kite string are indeed parallel and that the composition is almost perfectly matching one of the Golden Ratios (and incidentally, one of LR overlays). But, that is all post factum. In the field, it was just instinct.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Good instinct, too, I'd say.

I suspect even Master Russ Yoda might grudgingly accept that your cropping was permissible in this instance, since there was a good reason for it, known at the time of exposure.

And it's good to know that you have the Rule of Thirds and the Golden Mean and probably a lot of other similar stuff etched onto your retinas, ready to nudge your instinct when needed.

[BernardLanguillier]

I like everything, except the position of the kite.

IMHO, it should be 27.43% higher in the frame for a balanced composition. There is just too much blue emptiness on the upper right.

The blue is great though, what software was this convered with if I may ask?

Cheers,
Bernard

[William Walker]

Slobodan - have you checked your messages lately?

William

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... There is just too much blue emptiness on the upper right...

I could try to defend it as a negative space, but there is another reason as well. Ever since I had some early successes (or beginner's luck, I you wish) in having my photos published for editorial or commercial purposes, I made a conscious decision to add two things when working a scene: to shoot more verticals, and to allow for more empty space (for title or copy purposes).

... The blue is great though, what software was this convered with if I may ask?

It was Lightroom 5. The blue comes from: a polarizer, Daylight WB (which adds +10 magenta by default), Clarity (set at the LR Preset +25... Clarity tends to add more blue saturation than other) and an additional +10 shift in Blue Hue toward Magenta in the HSL panel. Ah, yes, Contrast was increased and Blacks decreased, which, in Lightroom, increases saturation along the way.

[Mjollnir]

I could try to defend it as a negative space, but there is another reason as well. Ever since I had some early successes (or beginner's luck, I you wish) in having my photos published for editorial or commercial purposes, I made a conscious decision to add two things when working a scene: to shoot more verticals, and to allow for more empty space (for title or copy purposes).

It was Lightroom 5. The blue comes from: a polarizer, Daylight WB (which adds +10 magenta by default), Clarity (set at the LR Preset +25... Clarity tends to add more blue saturation than other) and an additional +10 shift in Blue Hue toward Magenta in the HSL panel. Ah, yes, Contrast was increased and Blacks decreased, which, in Lightroom, increases saturation along the way.

If I can ask (and I still don't know whether this is a faux-pas around here) what gear did you use to get that shot?

I'm always interested in the different color profiles and signatures from different manufacturers.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... what gear did you use to get that shot?...

Canon 60D, 70-200/4 IS zoom; B+W polarizer; Adobe Standard color profile.

[Mjollnir]

Canon 60D, 70-200/4 IS zoom; B+W polarizer; Adobe Standard color profile.

Thanks!

I find that, for whatever reason, Canon and Panasonic have very distinctive blues.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I find that, for whatever reason, Canon and Panasonic have very distinctive blues.

I do not know anything about "Panasonic blue," but you can't really judge "Canon blue" by this photo. If anything, it is "my" blue, as you can see from the attached before/after:

[mjrichardson]

I'm sure this is going to appear rude, which is honestly not my objective, I can see the balance, negative space and all that so I'm sure technically it ticks a lot of boxes but as a visual thing it just does nothing at all for me, just a little boring with very little to keep my interested, sorry! I'm sure it's a personal thing but I tend to find images that are analysed like this tends to distract from the beauty of the thing, it just feels like lines and method rather than saying something or having artistic merit. Just my opinion though!

Mat

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I tend to find images that are analysed like this tends to distract from the beauty of the thing, it just feels like lines and method...

Mat, I appreciate the thought. It is certainly a valid point of view.

As I said, it is "analyzed like this" after the fact, i.e., it was not meant to "tick a lot of boxes" in advance. The analysis was meant to explain, not to persuade, why I instinctively found it pleasing. After all, rules (or guidelines) of composition and perception exist because, on balance, they do work after all, for most people and most generations.

I also tend to agree what Socrates said:

"I will try to speak of the beauty of shapes... straight lines and curves and the shapes made of them... They are not beautiful for any particular reason or purpose, as other things are, but are eternally, and by their very nature, beautiful, and give a pleasure of their own quite free from the itch of desire: and in this way colors can give a similar pleasure..."

Again, thanks for taking the time to view and express your opinion about my photograph.