Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: Ed Blagden on July 11, 2009, 01:03:30 am
-
Criticism appreciated, please.
Ed
[attachment=15295:IMG_2060.jpg]
(24mm, f/8, ISO100)
-
Well, I like it. I'm afraid that's not very critical, however. The trees on opposite sides of the upper frame provide a good 'barn door' effect that draws the eye and toward the center of the image, and the long exposure smoothed out the ripples on the water.
Mike.
-
For composition it's not bad, but the colors are good enough to overcome any other shortcomings.
-
Criticism appreciated, please.
[attachment=15295:IMG_2060.jpg]
(24mm, f/8, ISO100)
It gives a wonderful impression of serenity and peace (which I need, since there's a chainsaw running outside my window at the moment). I like it.
Jeremy
-
I like the way the trees are reflected: Deep black trunks but then the top branches produce a smokey mist.
I tried cropping some of the bottom junk away, but I'm not sure it worked because it lost too much of the water. Moving down and closer might have eliminated some of that but you would have lost the L/R branches that Mike highlighted.
Nice.
Dave
-
Like it a lot Ed, best landscape you've posted. Love the colour tones, Sihlouettes, and misty waters. IMHO the bottom needs to be there, gives the impression of standing on the foreshore.
Cheers
Brian
-
Criticism appreciated, please.
Ed
[attachment=15295:IMG_2060.jpg]
(24mm, f/8, ISO100)
I would have cropped a little off the top. Nevertheless, a very pleasing and interesting picture.
-
Those colors are absolutely fantastic! They are so good, that personally I don't want to see much else in this shot. If you shoot something like this again with that kind of eye popping color, I'd like to see you focus on just one or two elements, to keep it really simple. Overall, though, a really special shot.
John
-
Criticism appreciated, please.
Ed
[attachment=15295:IMG_2060.jpg]
(24mm, f/8, ISO100)
Lovely, particularly the colors and the water texture. The only thing I might suggest is to have moved in a bit so you don't have that sliver of shoreline in the foreground.
Peter
-
Thanks all. I think this one will go on the wall.
I agree with various comments that the shoreline is problematic. In fact the original had more and I cropped some of it out (sorry Russ... I know I shouldn't. The thing is that the dawn light at the equator changes so fast you have little time to recompose. A weak excuse, but there you are.)
However when I tried to crop the shoreline out altogether the image somehow lost some sense of you actually being there. It is of course a matter of personal taste, but I like landscape photos to have a sense that the viewer can walk into them.
Ed
-
Hi Ed, I too am a fan of the long exposure on moving water, well done.
-
The thing is that the dawn light at the equator changes so fast you have little time to recompose. A weak excuse, but there you are.)
Ed, if you want to revisit that locale for a redo or a different approach, then you might want to consider scouting the area during the day with your camera and picking your ideal composition. You could even leave your tripod set up if you think it will be safe. Then, just go back the next morning a bit early, set up your gear, and wait for that perfect light. I've done this several times. Keep the good work coming!
John
-
Ed, I like the colors and the mood in this one! Especially the sky towards the horizon, the wonderful water reflections and the overflooded trees. What I dont like so much is the shore line, and that there is too much going on, too much different elements in a scene wich is potentially very calm. I think it could benefit a lot by a different composition concentrating on the attractive parts, disconnecting them from their "ordinary" surroundings. Probably anything that gets less elements into the endproduct. But that said, I also like it as it is.
Christian
-
OK, the shoreline seems to have bugged a few people so here is another shot a couple of minutes earlier, taken at 55mm, f/8, 2sec. I don't like it as much because the light isn't as good, but I suppose there is less going on in the image.
Ed
ps I didn't really want to get too close to the shoreline because I had seen a croc in the water.
[attachment=15375:IMG_2057.jpg]
-
OK, the shoreline seems to have bugged a few people so here is another shot a couple of minutes earlier, taken at 55mm, f/8, 2sec. I don't like it as much because the light isn't as good, but I suppose there is less going on in the image.
Ed
ps I didn't really want to get too close to the shoreline because I had seen a croc in the water.
[attachment=15375:IMG_2057.jpg]
Ed,
I would prefer the first one over the second too. Not so much because of the light (the shoot could still be enhanced by more contrast and saturation) but because of the composition wich works better in the first one.
-
ps I didn't really want to get too close to the shoreline because I had seen a croc in the water.
Pah! Feeble excuse. Crocs don't eat photographers. It's a well-known fact. They just think about it.
[attachment=15382:croc.jpg]
Jeremy
-
Pah! Feeble excuse. Crocs don't eat photographers. It's a well-known fact. They just think about it.
Jeremy
If I ever go on a shoot with you, Jeremy, I will bring my running shoes... I don't have to be faster than him, just you
Ed
-
I still prefer the one with the shoreline Ed...and if you'd worn those running shoes, with the croc in even better.
Cheers
Brian
-
OK, the shoreline seems to have bugged a few people so here is another shot a couple of minutes earlier, taken at 55mm, f/8, 2sec. I don't like it as much because the light isn't as good, but I suppose there is less going on in the image.
Ed
ps I didn't really want to get too close to the shoreline because I had seen a croc in the water.
Before I started photography in a serious way, I was always taken by coloured surnrises and sunsets, and still am in many ways. But one thing I learned was that you can't escape good design no matter how impressive the colours in a sunrise or sunset. That's just a general comment on such shots. IMHO the shot would be better without the trees framing the image. It does not look like a natural frame but a cut-off part. If you crop you lose a lot of sky and some foreground but it still looks great cropped with its simple silhouetted elements. I may crop differently, but that's up to you. And, I agree many suggested crops ruin the spirit of an image. The ideal would have been the same shot without the trees framing and the foreground distractions.
JMR
-
Here's what I would do:
-
Here's what I would do:
Hmm - I quite like that. Much more "correct" and balanced than mine. That said, I think I still prefer my original version because for me it has more of a sense of being there. But I suppose it is all a matter of taste.
-
If I ever go on a shoot with you, Jeremy, I will bring my running shoes... I don't have to be faster than him, just you
Ed
You won't need running shoes, then, Ed!
Jeremy