Suggestions for cropping?

[Mjollnir]

Or, for that matter, improving this in general?

I like the shot, but I don't like the foreground necessarily, nor the hint of the dirt backroad we were on to far frame left.


Evening Lowering, Bishop, CA, NIK by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr

[kikashi]

I'd probably cut off about half the foreground, up to the top of the bare area on the left. Otherwise, it looks pretty good to me.

Jeremy

[RSL]

You can't have a background without a foreground. Don't crop.

[amolitor]

I'm with Russ. I like the foreground, it gives the landscape context and weight, it gives the composition literal depth.

If you absolutely hate it, trim it very very carefully. The image becomes imbalanced and unpleasant quite quickly as you slice away foreground.

[Justan]

It’s a nice capture. The color scheme in combination with the clouds is very enjoyable. Were it my capture, I’d clone a bush or 3 on the empty left side spaces and call it done.

Also, I think I’d have taken a step or so to the left and caught the roadway as it leads the eye to the midground - not that that is really needed in this composition, but just sayin’...

[Doug Frost]

You can't have a background without a foreground. Don't crop.

+1.0

[fike]

It a good shot. You seem to know you don't like the foreground, so crop it. It's your image, don't ask for permission to make it reflect your vision.

With that said, I like the current proportions.  I wouldn't crop.  The foreground texture is an interesting counterpoint to the texture of the sky.  The trail on the left is not initially obvious until you look for it.  If you were really bent out of shape by it, you could do a free transform to pull the left side out a bit while keeping all the sky dimensions...if you are into that sort of thing. 

[Rob C]

Don't crop; you've done that part already and will only kill the dynamic.

What I'd do, were it mine, is darken the top of the frame with a feathered grade, something that was oh so simple and visceral with wet print. I'd probably try the same darkening at the base, too, though this might just be the influence of Van Morrison on the system as I write... what can you lose? You might like it. But don't fix what ain't broke: the framings good, and I think you gain something by not having the weeds spread evenly across all of the frame. Life is seldom a reflection, left of right.

Rob C

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Or, for that matter, improving this in general?...

How about this:

[RSL]

It's a great conversion, Slobodan, but it's a completely different picture making a completely different statement.

[Mjollnir]

I was thinking about doing that to bring out some detail and cut out some noise, but hadn't gotten around to it yet.

Well, well done (if I do say so myself)!

** On edit **

In fact, I'm working on that tonight, with some of your queues.  Really starting to like this whole black and white photography thing.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It's a great conversion, Slobodan, but it's a completely different picture making a completely different statement.

Yes, indeed. So?

It is putting emphasis on one part of the image (distant mountain range, with slivers of light illuminating it), not all over it. It is preventing the eye wondering out of the image (at the top) too soon (notice how the top 10% of the OP image is rather light, with the shape of clouds pointing up and out?).

Different statement? Sure. The OP statement tells me "I like something here, but I do not know exactly what or why, so I'll leave everything equally important for the viewer to chose from, like a smorgasbord."

If you put something in front of me to look at, make a statement, do not let me, as a viewer, do the work for you. Tell me why I shall pay attention to it. Grab my attention.

[WalterEG]

The usual excellence from you Slobodan.

And it is reassuring,too, that the OP expressed his gratitude also.

W

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I was thinking about doing that to bring out some detail and cut out some noise, but hadn't gotten around to it yet.

Well, well done (if I do say so myself)!

** On edit **

In fact, I'm working on that tonight, with some of your queues.  Really starting to like this whole black and white photography thing.

Thanks, appreciated. You can PM me if you want to know what exactly I did to the image. Alternatively, if others are interested, I can publish it here.

[Mjollnir]

Thanks, appreciated. You can PM me if you want to know what exactly I did to the image. Alternatively, if others are interested, I can publish it here.

If you don't mind, here would be fine.

I noticed right off the bat the darkening the top of the frame sort of draws the viewers eyes down to center frame.

Clever, that.

[RSL]

Yes, indeed. So?

Reminds me of what one of my granddaughters said long ago when she was little and we were playing a game. I said, "Whitney, you're cheating." She gave me a level look and said, "So?"

Different statement? Sure. The OP statement tells me "I like something here, but I do not know exactly what or why, so I'll leave everything equally important for the viewer to chose from, like a smorgasbord."

Well said my friend. The same thing applies to street photography. There are pictures on the street and then there are street photographs. The first leaves everything equally important (though there may be a subject), the second makes a point.

[Rob C]

How about this:

Amen.

Rob C

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Reminds me of what one of my granddaughters said long ago when she was little and we were playing a game. I said, "Whitney, you're cheating." She gave me a level look and said, "So?"...

Yep, that sounds about right from a kid's perspective

But I was actually paying homage to a more "mature" response from one of your heroes (allow me to presume so), Donald Rumsfeld, when reminded in an interview that the majority of public opinion is against the war. His answer: "So?"

[AFairley]

I'd probably cut off about half the foreground, up to the top of the bare area on the left. Otherwise, it looks pretty good to me.

Jeremy

Yes, I would crop up the the top of the bare area about 1/3 in from the left, I think the near foreground tends to suck energy out of the photograph.

[kikashi]

Yes, I would crop up the the top of the bare area about 1/3 in from the left, I think the near foreground tends to suck energy out of the photograph.

You and I, Alan, would appear to be in a minority of two. Not that that's a problem, of course.

Jeremy