Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Lone Sentry  (Read 3326 times)
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2012, 01:27:41 PM »
ReplyReply

And you're his lap dog, Slobie. Jen was right.

I do not remember Jen ever implicating me in anything, let alone "Russ' kennel."

If, however, you meant to imply that anyone who disagrees with your primitive debate style belongs there... then you are probably right. Anyone who cares to pay attention to such things would have noticed that Russ and I have a fair share of disagreements, both politically and photographically, yet never stooped so low to call each other names.

I understand that it takes a bit of intelligence, civility and sense of humor to disagree with someone without resorting to primitivism, thus I sympathize with your struggle.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Dale Villeponteaux
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191



« Reply #21 on: December 02, 2012, 02:05:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Worth hanging.  I would like to see the original capture.  It would help me to understand the postprocessing
Logged

A modest man, with much to be modest about
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4060



« Reply #22 on: December 02, 2012, 03:39:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I disagree, with both you and M. Cartier-Bresson. And you're an idiot if you conflate length of membership on this forum with photographic experience. It doesn't begin or end with LuLa.

Bow down, chaps. We are honoured to be in the presence of a Master. Let us be silent and heed his Words of Wisdom.

More sensibly, remove the trees from the left and you ruin the photo. I disagree with his dogmatism as regards cropping, but on this occasion, Russ is right.

Jeremy
Logged
Bruce Cox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 694



WWW
« Reply #23 on: December 02, 2012, 04:34:31 PM »
ReplyReply

The image is exceptional. Having said that, regardless of how, or even if, the LHS is addressed, the overall image would be better without the high contrast/weight that's there now.

I don't know what LHS refers to, but I agree, I think, about the "high contrast".  After photoshopping the image into black and white, I like the trees on the left that way.  I was right when I didn't like them in color, so I have now been right on both sides of this argument.

Bruce
Logged
Ed B
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


« Reply #24 on: December 02, 2012, 05:16:23 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know what LHS refers to....

Left hand side, I think. The trees on the left don't bother me as much in b&w but they are a little distracting in color. Either way, great image.
Logged
marvpelkey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #25 on: December 02, 2012, 05:47:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks all for the comments, critiques and suggestions.

In RAW, this image was rather flat (and quite blue) and I must admit I struggled mightily and spent a lot of time trying to balance the tones and the struggle between too flat and too contrasty. In fact, by the time I reached the current version, I must of had at least 7 iterations saved, for comparison, done in three different conversion programs. Some were more contrasty while others were less. I finally settled on this version. As to the cropping, or not, while I have no philosophical issue with cropping an image if required, my reasons were twofold for not cropping - I wanted to have as much space around the tree to "enhance" the feeling of "lone", the other is, after spending a small fortune on my D3X with a, then, large real estate sensor, I cringe every time I contemplate reducing that acreage. In closing, this is one of those images that I will probably re-visit and re-process forever and never be completely happy with the result.

Marv
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8084



WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2012, 07:00:09 PM »
ReplyReply

You got it just right, IMHO.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 2808


« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2012, 03:13:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote Russ

it very rarely happens that a photograph which was feebly composed can be saved by reconstruction of its composition under the darkroom’s enlarger; the integrity of vision is no longer there."

Unquote

Russ this is something that you like to quote regularly. The problem I have with it is that in the final print - or upload to the internet - nobody knows what .....the integrity of vision.....was? Only the photographer knows that. The vision, if he/she had one, was possibly/probably compromised by the aspect ratio of the camera lens? This means that in a lot of instances cropping to get back that vision is necessary? This is what I find most of the time. Not cropping and leaving in superfluous objects and dead space means criticism is heaped upon your head if the final print/upload is shown to someone. As stated the vision is only known to the photographer and isn't known to the viewer. Personally I think there is an art in cropping and getting it "right" can make an image. Smiley 
Logged

RobbieV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 261


« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2012, 10:30:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I would have a hard time keeping the processing as delicate as you have with this. It's a beautiful image and I wouldn't change a thing.
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2012, 10:46:02 AM »
ReplyReply

At the risk of sounding like a one-trick pony, may I suggest flipping the image?

I think it would diminish the "weight" the left-had side trees (in the original image) have, while still keeping them in the image as a counter balance for the much bigger RHS. It would also provide a nice lead-in diagonal, leading straight to the main point of interest. Lower-left-to-upper-right diagonals typically imply movement into the image, while upper-left-to-lower-right diagonals imply movement out of the image
« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 10:49:46 AM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Didymus
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


« Reply #30 on: December 03, 2012, 12:47:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Beautiful image.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4060



« Reply #31 on: December 03, 2012, 01:28:19 PM »
ReplyReply

At the risk of sounding like a one-trick pony, may I suggest flipping the image?

I usually agree with your suggestions, Slobodan, but for some reason I strongly dislike this one. Just me, perhaps.

Jeremy
Logged
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1037


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: December 03, 2012, 02:54:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Excellent shot, very atmospheric and beautiful.

I wish it was mine.

Dave
Logged

Fine Art Photography on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
marvpelkey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2012, 03:04:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Slobodan,

Curious, I reversed the image as you suggested and looked at it big on my computer. Perhaps if I had no familiarity to the place photographed, I may tend to agree with you but, because I have visited this place a gazillion times, I find the reversed image very weird and my connection to the place makes it difficult to look at the reversed image with a dispassionate calculating eye. Sort of like taking the typical photo of the leaning tower and showing a reversed image to a local, I suppose.

Marv
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2012, 03:10:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Marv, can't argue with that. Geographical fidelity is always a major consideration with image flipping, especially for those in the know, like yourself or your local market.

Can't argue with Jeremy either, as it is a matter of personal preference.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Dave (Isle of Skye)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1037


Don't mistake lack of talent for genius.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 03, 2012, 06:17:06 PM »
ReplyReply

At the risk of sounding like a one-trick pony, may I suggest flipping the image?

Sorry Slobodan, but that I really don't get, I can understand and fully agree with cropping when the image needs it, rotating macros and abstracts, not a problem, but flipping landscapes? No flipping way  Roll Eyes

Dave

Logged

Fine Art Photography on the Misty Isle of Skye
http://www.photography.info
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 05, 2012, 03:02:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Congratulations on a fine image. Very nice capture and a job well done revisiting the scene.

I am however also in the camp of readjusting crop. First of all, I am not diametrically opposed to cropping since I am a proponent of freedom-of-speech, and if a crop tells a better story, then a crop tells a better story. Whether you have seen this crop prior to capture is largely irrelevant.

Previsualising a crop is more about determining the relevant elements in a picture. Which means it may be useful to snap a slightly larger picture to be able to weight the elements in post-processing.

In this case for example a useful argument can be had over the LHS element. For one, it contributes to the "realism", leaving it out makes the image tend towards a digital manipulated composed image, as if the tree was pasted in. However, in the current crop it also distracts from the subject. Had you captured a slightly larger crop with more of those trees, you could always decide in post how much is necessary to tell the story.

Considering the elements I would personally opt for something along the line of the attached crop, which to me results in a better overall balance and emphasis, including the flow drawn by the mist. I would certainly keep the colors, but would consider doing something with the sky. An ever so slight graduated color perhaps. I would further rotate the image to level the waterline.
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 05, 2012, 03:06:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Lower-left-to-upper-right diagonals typically imply movement into the image, while upper-left-to-lower-right diagonals imply movement out of the image

Well, even if this were true, would it perhaps be useful to the image to preserve the original lines in order to emphasize the "loneliness"? Since if we are drawn toward the subject it will be more about wanting to be at that spot, as opposed to being repelled?
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
marvpelkey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #38 on: December 07, 2012, 06:57:36 PM »
ReplyReply

OPGR,

Thanks for the comments and the time taken to offer some suggestions.

As to the crop, at first glance it looks promising. I will give it a try on the original and put it full size on my monitor to get a better feel.

Regarding the colours, the RAW was, except for a whole lot of blue, very bland and I had to bump it up considerably in the orange/yellows to even get it to what it is.

As I always do, I used a bubble level during capture and it seems pretty level to my eye. You may have noticed, or not, the line of highlighted water is not an indication of level as, if you look closely, the horizon is a bit above that (look at the point of the land on the left and the more rounded points on the two on either side of the passageway).

Marv
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad