|
|
|
wolfnowl
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2010, 07:32:50 PM » |
 Reply
|
Well, everyone gets an opinion. Personally I find it distracting from the wonderful ethereal feel of the clouds and background. I'd remove it. Some might find it anchoring, though.
Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dwood
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2010, 08:11:21 PM » |
Reply
|
Well, everyone gets an opinion. Personally I find it distracting from the wonderful ethereal feel of the clouds and background. I'd remove it. Some might find it anchoring, though.
Mike. Thanks for your vote on the foreground bit Mike. I have mixed feelings about it myself. The version below has the foreground with a bit more light. Thought it needed it. Okay, keep the critiques coming folks.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Behar
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2010, 09:21:19 PM » |
Reply
|
Nope....
No foreground needed here....IMO
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dwood
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2010, 09:37:13 PM » |
Reply
|
Nope....
No foreground needed here....IMO Well, that's two votes against. Thanks for your input Joe. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Slobodan Blagojevic
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2010, 10:20:45 PM » |
Reply
|
There isn't enough foreground interest to justify any inclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
erictoddjohnson
Newbie
 Offline
Posts: 36
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2010, 10:55:03 PM » |
Reply
|
To my eye the sky is more interesting than the shore in the foreground, so I'd crop out the foreground about a third to half way between the shore and the island.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kikashi
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2010, 02:40:04 AM » |
Reply
|
Well, that's two votes against. Thanks for your input Joe. Make it three! Certainly, if you leave it in, don't make it lighter. Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Behar
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2010, 08:04:16 AM » |
Reply
|
no foreground...thanks for the input folks Doug, Any chance we can see one a little darker too? I suspect it might benefit from it. There's no detail to speak of in the trees and mountain in the back, so let it go darker. I think the sky and water might benefit from it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Myrvaagnes
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2010, 08:52:50 AM » |
Reply
|
Here's a dissenting view: I'd like to keep just a tiny bit of the foreground as an anchor. I would crop it like this:
[attachment=20297:cropped.jpg]
I would also try darkening it a bit (I cropped but did nothing else).
Eric
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
francois
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2010, 08:54:53 AM » |
Reply
|
Here's a dissenting view: I'd like to keep just a tiny bit of the foreground as an anchor. I would crop it like this:
[attachment=20297:cropped.jpg]
I would also try darkening it a bit (I cropped but did nothing else).
Eric I like this version a lot. I can't yet decide between this one or Doug's latest version but in any case, both are better than the original. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 16, 2010, 10:13:49 AM by francois »
|
Logged
|
Francois
|
|
|
|
dwood
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2010, 10:07:09 AM » |
Reply
|
Doug,
Any chance we can see one a little darker too?
I suspect it might benefit from it. There's no detail to speak of in the trees and mountain in the back, so let it go darker. I think the sky and water might benefit from it. Joe - this one's a tad bit darker, but not too much. I wonder if your monitor is a bit brighter than mine. I wouldn't want to go darker than this, at least as far as what I'm seeing on my end. Let me know what you see with this one.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Behar
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2010, 02:19:10 PM » |
Reply
|
Joe - this one's a tad bit darker, but not too much. I wonder if your monitor is a bit brighter than mine. I wouldn't want to go darker than this, at least as far as what I'm seeing on my end. Let me know what you see with this one. Doug, When you said "a bit" you really meant a bit I'm not trying to to convince you one way or the other but to my eyes the image begs for that really saturated, almost over the top look. Let the trees and mountain go black. You've got plenty of colour in the image, so don't touch the saturation. This might not be a "portfolio keeper" but if you make it dramatic, I bet you'll get lots of oohs and aahs from visitors (assuming you have it framed and on display in your house or office) And after all, we all like oohs and aahs |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dwood
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 16, 2010, 03:42:23 PM » |
Reply
|
Doug,
When you said "a bit" you really meant a bit
I'm not trying to to convince you one way or the other but to my eyes the image begs for that really saturated, almost over the top look. Let the trees and mountain go black. You've got plenty of colour in the image, so don't touch the saturation.
This might not be a "portfolio keeper" but if you make it dramatic, I bet you'll get lots of oohs and aahs from visitors (assuming you have it framed and on display in your house or office)
And after all, we all like oohs and aahs Thanks Joe. I'll toy with it a bit more. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
seamus finn
|
|
« Reply #15 on: February 16, 2010, 04:29:31 PM » |
Reply
|
I think Eric nailed it - beautiful image just got better.
Seamus
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
