Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: GEOFFREYJAMES on October 29, 2010, 11:54:58 pm

Title: Central Park
Post by: GEOFFREYJAMES on October 29, 2010, 11:54:58 pm
Not much to say. 
Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: popnfresh on November 02, 2010, 01:46:11 pm
I like the composition and atmospherics of this. The unusual shape and deeper tonality of the foreground tree makes it stand out from its setting. The overall effect is gently surreal. This is a little reminiscent of some of Paul Caponigro's work in the British Isles from the 60s.
Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: wolfnowl on November 02, 2010, 03:24:36 pm
It's a nice image, but I'd want to remove the tilt - otherwise the water in the pond should all be pouring out the left side of the image.

Mike.
Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: RSL on November 03, 2010, 10:35:29 am
Goeff, It's a pleasant tourist type shot, but it would be much, much better with people in it.
Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: popnfresh on November 03, 2010, 11:29:17 am
Goeff, It's a pleasant tourist type shot, but it would be much, much better with people in it.
I agree with Mike that the image needs straightening, but I disagree with Russ. I don't see it as a tourist shot at all, and it's more effective as a landscape without people.
Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: David Saffir on November 05, 2010, 12:32:13 pm
This is almost a classic-style image of Central Park - almost looks like winter. Looks like cool weathe, no people, etc. I grew up in New York, and so the image is quite evocative to me. The collapsed fence adds to the mood.

Some thoughts for you:

Overall, you have relatively good tonal separation and contrast - they might be improved, but more on this later. I enjoy looking at the tree, with its cultivated, flower-like shape and many branches. I also find the double circle of pond and walkway to be pleasing.

Things I find troubling are the blown-out areas of the sky, and the bulls-eye composition. I suggest you consider trying to recover a bit of the cloud cover in the sky (perhaps by compositing a darker frame with this one), or at least try the Recovery slider in Lightroom or Camera RAW.

Also, please consider that the tree is dead center in the image. This usually makes an image feel static, diminished movement or visual energy. If you had taken this shot from an angle to camera right, and put the tree frame left by the rule of thirds, you might find that the image would hold the viewer's attention more completely. This would also get away from the perfectly balanced view of the water on either side of the tree, which is a bit too constructed for me.

Overall, a very interesting image, perfect for black and white. Well done!

David Saffir
GuruShots Photo Critique (http://www.gurushots.com/)

Title: Re: Central Park
Post by: GEOFFREYJAMES on November 09, 2010, 07:52:39 pm
Thankyou  for all your comments.  The photograph was made with an 8x10 inch camera,  which is not something used by your average tourist.  Also less susceptible to  PP tweaking.   It was done during a seven-year project to document the work of FL OLmsted.   I made the decision, perhaps wrong, not to concentrate on people,  but on the nature of these constructed landscapes.  I agree with the poster about symmetrical images being a bit static,  but this is how I saw this particular image.   I am not a believer in rules -- especially rules of so-called composition, which is more properly referred to as framing.  I am on the road at the moment,  playing  with a new Leica M9 and will post some stuff later.

ttp://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=viewing+olmsted&x=-137&y=-1