06/07/12

[Riaan van Wyk]

Your thoughts please?

[Rob C]

The picture is great, with a very interesting set of perspectives, but there's something muddy about the overall tones that I don't like. It could well be that that's how nature had them, but were it mine, I'd ignore nature and brighten it all up a tad.

Rob C

[popnfresh]

I agree that the tonalities are rather muddy. The color palate is almost monochrome too. A b&w conversion can bring out the contrast and textures.

[amolitor]

Nice, I like the similarity in hue between elements of the foreground stump and the sodium (?) lights in the distance.

It feels like a bit of a gimmick, the radical version of the "near/far relationship" trope, but what a gimmick! It's a fine and interesting image that rewards a closer examination, and that's an excellent thing.

[RSL]

I'd rather keep the color with a bit of work. How about this?

[Riaan van Wyk]

Much obliged for the comments- they are apreciated.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Simplicity. What happened to that?

The foreground stump barely needs the second one, let alone the distant city lights. I can see a role for the foreground stamp and the city lights, even for the two stumps perhaps, but just piling up interesting elements does not necessarily result in an interesting photograph.

[amolitor]

Slobodan, I think the photo is really about the foreground stump and the city lights, with the related hues and contrasting ideas.

The middle distance stump.. well, it's THERE and if you've ever tried removing a stump you know it's a job and a half! I happen to think it balances the frame nicely, fitting into the crook for the foreground stump nicely and filling what would otherwise be too much negative space (I think -- I haven't got one of those fancy context aware fill things to check). Also, it conceals the lights a little more, which is a good thing I think. The lights need to be there, but subtly.

That's my take on it. The actual photographer is probably thinking 'what a pile of ...' right now!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... if you've ever tried removing a stump you know it's a job and a half!... I haven't got one of those fancy context aware fill things to check...

Again, what happened with pre-Photoshop tools? You know, old-fashioned hardware tools like sandals, shoes, even barefoot... all that can help you move a bit to the left or right. Simplicity should be first sought in viewfinder, then, and only then, perhaps enhanced in PS.

[RSL]

I don't agree, Slobodan. The middle distance stump echoes the close-in stump. It's just good composition -- a thing called "repetition."

[amolitor]

I am sad because I mucked my wonderful joke up with a confusing photoshop reference.

I meant actually removing the stump. With a shovel and tools and stuff. It was really funny in my head.

[ivan muller]

mmmm...I also like the B&W version over the colour....