Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Untitled  (Read 8849 times)
Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 682



WWW
« on: August 25, 2011, 02:27:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Your thoughts please?
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6196


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2011, 02:32:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Very nice.

Classical composition, calming, muted colors, good use of foreground, good balance between shadows and highlights (i.e., shadows not opened too much).
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 682



WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2011, 12:35:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you Slobodan.
Logged
Heinz
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2011, 03:12:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Howzit Boet,

Not too keen on the buildings in the pic. Maybe flatten them with a bulldozer or just clone them out with photoshop.  Grin
Logged
Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 682



WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2011, 12:01:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello Heinz

Yeah, I would love to flatten those buildings..them and the huge power lines towards the left makes compositions difficult from this spot.
Logged
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 563



WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2011, 04:44:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Howzit Boet,

Not too keen on the buildings in the pic. Maybe flatten them with a bulldozer or just clone them out with photoshop.  Grin

Hand of Man?

The composition reminds me of a Timo Lofgren picture, so that would make it a compliment!

William
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6516



WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2011, 09:47:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Exactly! The hand of man always is what makes good landscape.
Logged

popnfresh
Guest
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2011, 01:58:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Exactly! The hand of man always is what makes good landscape.

I guess that makes the majority of Ansel Adams' landscapes crap.
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6516



WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2011, 02:46:41 PM »
ReplyReply

You said that, Pop, not me. But I do think a lot of Ansel's stuff would have been better with the hand of man included. If you want to do great landscape you can do worse than to learn from Turner and Constable.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2011, 02:48:58 PM by RSL » Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2011, 05:08:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Exactly! The hand of man always is what makes good landscape.
Roll Eyes
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6196


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2011, 05:25:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Exactly! The hand of man always is what makes good landscape.

You know, Russ, I was about to comment about your comment, but then I realized that you and Eric are now closely watching what I post and measure it against your newly instituted snide-o-meter... so I'll pass Grin
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6516



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2011, 07:05:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Watch it, Slobodan. Michael's likely to lock the thread if you talk like that.
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2011, 10:53:59 PM »
ReplyReply

You know, Russ, I was about to comment about your comment, but then I realized that you and Eric are now closely watching what I post and measure it against your newly instituted snide-o-meter... so I'll pass Grin
Slobodan, I consider Russ's latest comment about "the hand of man" to be an excellent example of a snide comment (unlike this one).

Eric

__________ <= (space for inserting your own choice of smiley)
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 24, 2011, 10:57:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Riaan,

First, let me apologize for taking your thread off topic.

Next, let me say I like your photo. The grasses are very sensuous and the human artifacts are small enough that they don't bother me (but if it were my image, I would probably remove them, especially if I were planning to show it to Russ).

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
BlasR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2011, 07:11:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Riaan,

Eric, always looking for a fight, he became a mad man, so I am with you.  Lets fight back Grin
Logged

Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 682



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2011, 02:35:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Riaan,

First, let me apologize for taking your thread off topic.

Eric

Not to worry Eric, it's what makes LuLa special for me- the stables here are full of horses called " Tangent"
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2011, 06:12:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, since everyone seems to be pussy-footing around making any snide remarks here, allow me to take the bait:



Exactly! The hand of man always is what makes good landscape.

Rubbish. The truth is, any evidence of man in a landscape ruins it. The only tolerable evidence of man would be in a cityscape ... where buildings, skyscrapers, city lights, etc. are the main focus ... or perhaps a farmscape where the "peaceful farm" is the story. Those are totally different genres IMO.

But in a straight landscape shot (note the word "land"), any evidence of man is an automatic delete of the file (unless it is minor enough to where it can be "healed" out of the final image).




__________________________
__________________________




I guess that makes the majority of Ansel Adams' landscapes crap.
You said that, Pop, not me. But I do think a lot of Ansel's stuff would have been better with the hand of man included. If you want to do great landscape you can do worse than to learn from Turner and Constable.

Correction: that's exactly what you said, Russ (well, you implied it, technically). In fact, you went on to confirm your implication by stating how Ansel's work would have been better with "the hand of man" in there, as if you're in a position to judge one of the great masters of the genre. No disrespect, Russ, but judging by your last effort at a landscape, I seriously doubt your qualifications to judge anyone's landscape work, let alone that of Ansel Adams.

Stick to street stuff, Russ, because you're very good at that Wink

Jack



.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2011, 06:14:27 PM by John Koerner » Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6516



WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2011, 06:47:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Rubbish. The truth is, any evidence of man in a landscape ruins it. The only tolerable evidence of man would be in a cityscape ... where buildings, skyscrapers, city lights, etc. are the main focus ... or perhaps a farmscape where the "peaceful farm" is the story. Those are totally different genres IMO.

Well! Here we go!

Jack, have you ever gone to a museum and stood in front of one of Turner's masterpiece landscapes? Try it some time. It may change your attitude toward landscape. If you can't find a Turner, try a Constable or a Thomas Cole, or an Albert Bierstadt. These guys understood what landscape should be. Ansel's all-time greatest photograph was "Woman Behind Screen Door, Independence, California." Bet you've never seen it.
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2011, 08:51:56 PM »
ReplyReply

See? I don't need to make snide remarks. I can count on my serfs and minions to make them for me.

Thank you, Jack!

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4088



« Reply #19 on: September 26, 2011, 01:57:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Rubbish. The truth is, any evidence of man in a landscape ruins it. The only tolerable evidence of man would be in a cityscape ... where buildings, skyscrapers, city lights, etc. are the main focus ... or perhaps a farmscape where the "peaceful farm" is the story. Those are totally different genres IMO.
Since you start pithily (not snidely), Jack, so will I: drivel.

Don't try to ply the trade in England, if that's what you believe, or France or Italy or any other moderately densely populated country where the landscape has been formed, over hundreds of years, by man. Are you seriously suggesting that, for example, Michael's wonderful photos of the Palouse are not "landscape" because they show crop fields?

To suggest that only virgin landscapes such as the American south west are the only places where landscape photographers can take photographs makes no sense at all.

Jeremy
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad