|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
I think your version here definitely looks better compositionally than the two versions I posted (final and original). Take a look if you could at the version I just posted in response to Haru above. I used a perspective transform to fix what to me was a balance issue in the foreground with the flowers. The tones and colors still need work, but to me it flows a little better compositionally. But would love your perspective. |
Nov 18th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Haru, if you have a minute, can you take a look at this new version? The key here was that I did a perspective transformation. I think it improves the composition a lot, but would love your perspective. |
Nov 18th |
 |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks Bob. Yes, I think there is still some exploring to be done with the crop, including trying to use content aware fill to create some room. I like the added yellows although probably would not go as far as you did. |
Nov 18th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks Viren. That is helpful. I can try to "create" a little more space at the top. I'd also like to "create" a little more space at the bottom so the single flower (in the original) is not so close to the edge. The former is probably pretty easy. I think the later is going to be very challenging. Somehow content aware fill does not seem to work very well for me. |
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Hi Haru. Thank you for the comments and attempt - it was very clear. Particularly helpful was your comment about the visual balance. Yes, I think that is the problem, and crops seem to perhaps improve this but not eliminate it - but in some cases add other problems. I will keep playing with it and perhaps try to post again. |
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Reply |
Thanks Gloria. Suspect I did level things since it is easy to see that right in the display and I generally check. I am not sure how I would know now from this particular image. But regardless, I can correct things so it "looks" more level. Good catch.
I've tried many, many different crops. I think Haru has it right that the problem is a visual balance issue. But most of the crops don't seem to fully correct this. I will keep playing with it. |
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Bob. I like the crops that Gloria and Haru have done which simplify the image and get us down to a few things to consider. I think I would pick Haru's and bring the bottom edge up just a little to eliminate the sky peaking out under the bridge.
With that simpler image, I think Viren's question is very interesting - what are you trying to project? I think the simplicity but yet juxtaposition of two very different elements makes the viewer think. I can imagine staring at this for quite awhile wondering what is Bob saying? How does the bird relate to the bridge? Is it about the natural world colliding with man? Is it about man going to great feats of engineering trying to soar to great heights as the bird can much more simply do? Some would say that a great photograph makes the viewer uncomfortable by creating such questions without an obvious answer. I am not sure whether I agree or disagree - I am still trying to figure out such things. But I do agree that such an image holds the viewers attention. Which is in contrast to a beautiful image where the viewer says "Wow" and then moves on quickly.
Of course in this case, the fact that we have seen the un-cropped original might suggest that "what you are trying to say" is less than clear even to you (and I'm in that boat with my images most of the time). But that doesn't mean that you can't decide for yourself after the fact - after all something attracted you to the image in the first place.
Hope November is a better month. Cheers.
|
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Viren. I am less a fan of city scapes than natural landscapes, so I have a harder time judging this aesthetically. The lighting, as well as the building architecture to begin with, gives it a very futuristic look. You also have an orange/teal combination going with the buildings and the water in the foreground that further enhance that. I don't know if those are the "proper" colors, but they certainly work; overall there are strong complementary colors (including the sky). Compositionally I might perspective correct for the leaning buildings at the edges (left edge particularly), but that is a small thing. I find the choice of the crop (or framing) on the left a little awkward in terms of where it cuts things off, but that could just be me.
In terms of contrast, you could certainly go for a more contrasty look, and I think most people might. But I think there is nothing wrong with the softer look you have which I find more artistic and which gives a sense of atmosphere which I think goes with the futuristic sort of feel. I tend to softer looks though when others would be more dramatic.
Hope that helps. Cheers. |
Nov 15th |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Gloria. Your image allows one to almost feel the warmth of the sun. It obviously captures for you the emotions you felt that evening.
Since you asked for ideas on improving it, I think the key is to do a few things to enhance that feeling of warm embrace. The sunlit portion is probably warm enough, but you can cool down the rest of the photo using a mask and adjusting the color temperature. Doing this will help put some blue back in the sky. Additionally, you can darken the grass and the other foliage a bit, so the warm embrace pops more in contrast. Finally you can sharpen the subject tree a bit more, or perhaps slightly blur the other foliage in the background (and grass in the foreground). All of this is to emphasize what the photo is about, namely the warm embrace. I did all of that in the attached image.
I also find the tree in the upper left corner gets a little too close to the subject tree. So I've digitally trimmed it back with the goal that it helps frame the image, but does not intrude on the subject and distract the viewer. This is probably best done in photoshop.
Hope that helps. Cheers. |
Nov 13th |
 |
| 96 |
Nov 23 |
Comment |
Hi Haru. I really like your forest scenes, both because you come up with some beautiful compositions, as well as for your bravery in taking on forests which are so hard to shoot. I believe I see what you are trying to do here, using the "light" in the more distant center part of the image as the subject. I like it, but I don't think you've gone far enough in bringing that out as the subject.
I've probably gone too far. I don't have your subtle touch at this, at least not unless I go slower. But what I did was use a combination of cooling, brightening, hazing, and blurring the "subject" region to make it stand out. I also darkened the edges and exterior "non subject region". Finally, I brought it into Photoshop, and used a simple curve adjustment in the Lab color mode to pump up the colors a little, but also further enhance the color contrast of the bluish "subject" region. The result is below.
Couple of other comments. First, as I am sure you know, one of the challenges in these forest scenes is picking a shooting location that eliminates the overlap of tree trunks, particularly the darker ones nearer to the camera. You have a little bit of a mess in overlaps to the left of your subject. I am not sure if stepping to your right might have helped or just created other problems. Second, this sort of scene really needs resolution to look its best. It is never going to look stellar at 1200 pixels wide unless you are on a phone. And somehow your final is not even that, but just 1000 pixels wide. This is the sort of image that looks better and better printed large.
Hope that helps. Cheers.
|
Nov 13th |
 |
4 comments - 6 replies for Group 96
|
4 comments - 6 replies Total
|
