|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 32 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Russ, very eye catching. I see a lot of these, and by far, this is the most well crafted. Although I'm a huge fan of B&W, I prefer the color version too. Regardless, I admire how you made the leaves seem as if they are levitating. The underside reflection provides the image with a silver-like effect that makes for a pleasing tone. It completes the composition eloquently. |
Apr 23rd |
1 comment - 0 replies for Group 32
|
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Hey Russ, it's great to hear from you. Loads of thanks for the nice words.
|
Apr 21st |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Robert, thanks for the reply. I'm always afraid that I go too far with my negative comments. I don't necessarily agree that your images go too far. From everything I've seen from you, your images represent how you see and interpret a scene. To me, your style is appealing.
With your latest version, you have taken your photo in a different direction. Although the added foreground is interesting (emphasizing a leading line to the sea stacks), it creates a very busy lower half that conflicts with the calming upper half. Cheryl's version still seems closer to what I think you were after. What really feels awkward is more the composition, not the color. It's the sea stacks, partly because they fall out of frame. I might try removing the far-right section to see if that works. You have the perfect amount of detail there. The stacks are on the back side of your light source, so being in shadow, you presented that accurately.
Think about merging your originally presented image with Cheryl's. I think somewhere in there is the photograph you are looking for. Please show us what you come up with. |
Apr 19th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Dale, to my eyes, Robert's rendition makes your image come alive. When I first viewed your photo before any comments were made, the tonality didn't appeal to me. I realize that is a personal taste so I held back from commenting to see if I warmed up to it. Then Robert posted his version and it works much better.
Also, the center rock is a very nice feature. It provides excellent visual interest. The large rock on the left pulls my eyes away from continuing up stream. If you are inclined, try removing it on a separate layer and then if you don't like it, delete the layer.
One final thing, shooting up stream has a more pleasing effect than shooting downstream. I don't know why; it's just something I discovered. |
Apr 18th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Robert, the subtle, pastel colors are nice and calming. The long exposure effect on the water definitely gives your image that ethereal look.
I'm seeing through the comments made here so far that there's a struggle in making this a truly captivating photograph. If I'm sensing this consensus correctly, I would agree. Besides the ethereal look, as a viewer, I don't think that's enough to carry the image. With that said, I realize my photography is more punchy and at times lacks subtlety. I am always against others trying to impose their vision on someone else's art. So, I'm interested in what you were trying to say or project through your photo.
Cheryl's rendition provides for more drama, but you loose that pastel look that I think you were after. This might be the direction you want to go and just needed a fresh set of eyes to send you on your way. You came across a beautiful scene, Robert. You have the talent to make this image come alive. |
Apr 18th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Hi Cheryl, many thanks for the complimentary words. I suppose I could have shot this with a more open aperture, But with the foreground inches away from the lense, I wanted to be sure I got a sharp capture from front to back. f/13 probably would have done the trick, or even focus stacked. However, the light was changing way too fast. f/22 allowed for a speedy capture before the show disappeared. |
Apr 18th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hi Cheryl, This might be the best photo taken from the Tunnel View lookout that I've ever seen. Your processing is very well refined. Normally, I wouldn't give a photo like this more than a passing view. Although I am occasionally guilty of this, I'm not a big fan of photographs taken of such recognizable, iconic locations. I am a big proponent that we, as image makings, should find our own images. But I have to confess, you really made a special image here. Definitely worthy of a very large print displayed prominently. There's many schools of thought regarding an object extending beyond the upper horizontal frame. So with that in mind, I might suggest you try cropping or removing the far left tree. See how it feels to you. In my view, it's a small thing that probably won't make much difference.
I admire the interplay between the wispy fog in the valley and the drama in the sky. The two complement each other extraordinarily well. Your detail is breathtaking too. Nice going! |
Apr 15th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Comment |
Hey there Emily, your photography, and in particular, the way you see is really advancing. This is an exciting image. The intersecting lines, although chaotic, have a wonderful harmony. Curves have such a pleasing effect. Along with how the colors work together, you have a sophisticated sense of design. I like Robert's idea of making this capture at night. One of the aspects that a night shot might solve is the street level background. It feels busy and distracting. You might also consider cloning out the dominate traffic light. If I'm seeing it correctly, the way the traffic light is angled, the image feels pulled to the left. From my perspective, this is a terrific photo. |
Apr 15th |
| 96 |
Apr 21 |
Reply |
Thank you, Robert. I very much like your interpretation. You gave it an interesting crop. Also, it looks like you applied a blue tone in the foreground. I would like to replicate what you did here. Thanks again. |
Apr 10th |
4 comments - 4 replies for Group 96
|
5 comments - 4 replies Total
|
