Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Underberg  (Read 3009 times)
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« on: May 13, 2012, 02:00:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi

I took this one yesterday and am pleased with what I got.

I would like to hear what you think - even if it is "ho-hum"! (Chrisc only! Grin)

William
Logged

Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2029


« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2012, 02:07:04 AM »
ReplyReply

No... this image is not "ho hum".

Very nice - full of interest.
I just wish I could see the full-size view.

The B&W rendition was probably the way to go here given the lighting.

Well done.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Heinz
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2012, 02:15:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Warren,

You should be please with this pic, I think that a 1 or 2 stop gnd filter on the clouds may have helped. I posted a very similar pic taken from almost the same spot some time ago. While you were in Underberg, did you hear that John Hone passed away?
Logged
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2012, 02:55:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Howzit Heinz

I had a feeling of familiarity with this picture! I do remember yours, now that you mention it.
Sorry, no, I don't know who John Hone is. Who was he?

Thanks Tony.

William
Logged

John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2012, 05:34:55 AM »
ReplyReply

William

This is a really fine picture, made so by the contre-jour light which touches all the subjects with its particular magic. Well seen and framed.

Now then, just a thought. Because we have not one but two skies in this picture (one above and one reflected in the river) I find them to be competing for my attention. What I would be tempted to try, just for fun, would be to quite severely crop the top of the frame to reduce the amount of sky there, and place our attention on the sky below as it is reflected. This would also result in a more elongated aspect ratio, naturally.

It may not work, of course  Wink

John
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 05:36:49 AM by John R Smith » Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1798


Editing Allowed


« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2012, 10:43:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Contrary to my reputation it would seem, I like this image quite a lot. I do agree it should be cropped and think if you added a little bit of tonal depth to the cloud area just above the middle grouping of trees, it would help both the atmospheric relationship between the reflection and the lightbeams.

I like!  Grin
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5738



WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2012, 11:35:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Ah ah! The croppers are out in force, as usual, trying to make you come a cropper.

Don't listen to them, William. There's no crop that can improve this already very fine landscape.
Logged

amolitor
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 762


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2012, 01:46:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I find this to be very busy, I'm not really feeling a visual center at all, just a whole heap of interesting details, and a somewhat over-processed feeling. The tonal range of the sky, while not radical, is quite close to the tonal range of a lot of the land (tree-trunks excepted, obviously) which makes it feel tonally out of balance, which produces for me a similar effect to the stupid jet-black skies some people love. I feel like the land should have consistently more local contrast than the sky.

The image also feels oddly tilted to the right, which could just be the way the hills in the back are arranged, giving a false sense of an un-level horizon. I'm also not sure if there's lens distortion, or if it's just a wide lens combined with some un-fortuituous tree branches on the left edge that makes me feel that way.

That said, the details are all gorgeous, there's a lot to love here. The river vanishing into the distance is trying to produce a visual center at the base of the hills in the distance, it's just a little overwhelmed by the other material in the image, and can't quite pull it off for me.

I wouldn't crop it, god forbid! I'd go back with a longer lens, and I'd wait Wink
Logged

- Andrew

My awesome blog about photography: http://photothunk.blogspot.com
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2012, 01:15:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Howzit Heinz

Sorry, no, I don't know who John Hone is. Who was he?

Thanks Tony.

William

Firstly, thanks to all who took the time to comment, it is always appreciated!

Secondly, regarding the above quote: I visited by sister later yesterday, and, on her coffee table was a book "Encounters With Dragons" by John Hone! I have seen the book before but obviously did not remember the author.

The reason Heinz mentioned it was because he photographed the area where my post was taken extensively. As far as I know he used to do some serious mountain climbing with medium format equipment.

If anyone is interested, here is a nice link I found :   http://www.drakonline.co.za/featured-articles/160.html

Thanks again
William
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2012, 04:47:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Could you indicate for us with a red circle your primary point-of-interest or primary point-of-focus in this image?
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 14, 2012, 06:30:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Oscar

Sorry, I can't draw the circle for you (I am at work), however, I will tell you what my intentions were:

The foreground "pool" and grass bank were where my original focus was - it is an idyllic setting and somewhat un-African to me - I could picture this being somewhere in England.(I have a somewhat romanticised notion of England, but that is another story).

That was where my attention was focused. I was pleasantly surprised at the way the river then took me upstream and into the mountains.

I am not sure if that answers your question? Thank you for asking it - you forced me to think about it and I have learned from it.

I would like to hear your thoughts, based on what I have told you.

William
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 14, 2012, 06:47:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Here are some questions that come to mind:

What did you try to do in order to have the supporting elements and the framing support the point-of-interest? For example: the picture is in B&W, how does this support your initial idea? How does it support your secondary surprise? The crepuscular rays can be toned more dominantly or toned down. Are they somehow supporting the mood or possibly pointing to the point-of-interest?

The trees are sharp and drawn harshly. Which of them are of interest and why would they be drawn in that specific tonality? The vegetation is similarly toned in all parts of the image, which lacks separation and depth, at least in my observation. Is this by choice? If not, can it be done otherwise? (in other words: is there enough color separation to create tonal separation in B&W? Or does it need dodging & burning with a brush?)

There is a river with a certain flow and direction. Are viewers invited to travel up this river and direction? What will they find if they do? Both physically when viewing the picture, as well as in the minds eye? Is there an intrigue?

Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2012, 02:49:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Here are some questions that come to mind:

What did you try to do in order to have the supporting elements and the framing support the point-of-interest? For example: the picture is in B&W, how does this support your initial idea? How does it support your secondary surprise? The crepuscular rays can be toned more dominantly or toned down. Are they somehow supporting the mood or possibly pointing to the point-of-interest?

The trees are sharp and drawn harshly. Which of them are of interest and why would they be drawn in that specific tonality? The vegetation is similarly toned in all parts of the image, which lacks separation and depth, at least in my observation. Is this by choice? If not, can it be done otherwise? (in other words: is there enough color separation to create tonal separation in B&W? Or does it need dodging & burning with a brush?)

There is a river with a certain flow and direction. Are viewers invited to travel up this river and direction? What will they find if they do? Both physically when viewing the picture, as well as in the minds eye? Is there an intrigue?



Thank you for the detailed reply - I continue to learn (and may it never stop!)

These are certainly considerations I will take forward with me every time I stop to take (and work with) a photograph. I have also learned a great new word - "crepuscular". I did not know that those rays had a name.

Oscar, what you have not done, is tell me what you think of the picture. I would like to know.

Thank you again for taking the time.
Regards
William
Logged

opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2012, 04:46:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I think there is a picture in there somewhere, but this isn't it. The light is too harsh and direct, the tonal rendition is reversed and all over the place, the visual elements are too busy and compete for attention, the viewing is uncomfortable, and the framing isn't quite right.

But it's definitely a spot worth revisiting often. Next time make sure to tone down on the light reflected in the water. What direction does the sun travel over this spot?
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Riaan van Wyk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 676



« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2012, 12:51:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I quite like this William. Can't draw any circles or lines to substantiate my opinion though, I just get a feeling that this resonates with me.
Logged
William Walker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 419



WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2012, 03:01:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I went back to this location last week and took some pictures at sunrise.

In the light of the above comments - it would be interesting to see what you think of this one. I did not convert to B&W because I liked the subdued colours.

William
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5738



WWW
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2012, 04:53:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I know opinions are going to vary, but as far as I'm concerned, William, they're both top-notch.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5018



WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2012, 05:05:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I know opinions are going to vary, but as far as I'm concerned, William, they're both top-notch.

+1
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2029


« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2012, 05:21:57 PM »
ReplyReply

William this latest effort is wonderful.

Lovely pastel shades.
The pinks of the mountain and sky contrast beautifully with the blues of mist and middle ground.
Great image.

BTW I can feel the frosty cold coming up through the soles of my shoes just viewing this image. Brrr...

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2012, 05:10:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks William. The tones for this image are contradicting the subject matter for me. The water has this peaceful feel - yet the light is harsh. The river bank on the right foreground for me is a bit of 'nothing'.... and I think there is an image waiting for perhaps a differnt light and perhaps a slightly different vantage point.

Julie
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad