Gallery: LandscapePosted June 9, 2012121 views5 comments
I took this on a rainy, foggy March morning on a stream that feeds the Augusta Canal.
F22 @ 2.5 sec, 28mm
All comments and critique sought for improvement. Thanks
Bob
Comments
5 comments
Comment posted by Paul Duval on June 9, 2012 at 5:13 PM
The water has some great motion, but it doesn't seem able to carry the rest of the image. The cut bank in the middle is a bit of negative space that may be overwhelming the motion and energy of the stream. Since I'm not familiar with the spot, I don't know if you could have changed the perspective to shoot more downstream showing both sides of the rushing water, or just the water as the central theme of the image flowing through it? I like the tone and the color palette with the water motion . I guess I just want more of the flowing water in the frame.
Paul
Registered on June 30, 2009, 508 Posts, 1907 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on June 9, 2012 at 5:54 PM
Robert,
I think I have to agree with much of what Paul commented on. Although I expect the far bank is a more interesting rock formation in reality, but here it comes across as more of an exposed and eroded bank. Add to that it's size, it does dominate the scene a little - or as Paul commented, is a bit of negative space if you will. I like the idea of framing with the tree, but lacking any detail, I'm not sure it's adding to the composition. I do really like the patterns in the water. To me, that's the story and main subject. Lastly, and nothing you can do at the time, but the overcast, diffused light isn't adding much either - It's not hurting mind you, but also not helping. If that makes sense.
For me, in situations and conditions like this, I would look for more intimate comps. Zoom in on the water, patterns, etc. Or, if the rock formation above the stream is of interest, get a more intimate view of just the rock. Isolate and simplify when the grand view just isn't there.
Lon
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by Nancy Lea Sandy on June 9, 2012 at 7:53 PM
I like the swirling water at the base of the bank and the way it leads out to the left. I rather wish you hadn't included the tree trunk on that side as it blocks my view of the waters journey. Sure has a misty, early spring feel to it.
Registered on January 24, 2011, 576 Posts, 6942 Comments
Comment posted by Scott Smorra on June 9, 2012 at 7:56 PM
I agree with all of Paul and Lon's comments. The larger version seems a bit soft to me. What did you use for your web sharpening technique?
Registered on November 2, 2009, 161 Posts, 2143 Comments
Comment posted by Morris McClung on June 10, 2012 at 4:51 PM
I like the water motion as well. I think it could be improved with a little more curves and sat adjustment, but that's just personal taste.
Registered on May 7, 2007, 670 Posts, 19650 Comments
Comments
5 commentsPaul
I think I have to agree with much of what Paul commented on. Although I expect the far bank is a more interesting rock formation in reality, but here it comes across as more of an exposed and eroded bank. Add to that it's size, it does dominate the scene a little - or as Paul commented, is a bit of negative space if you will. I like the idea of framing with the tree, but lacking any detail, I'm not sure it's adding to the composition. I do really like the patterns in the water. To me, that's the story and main subject. Lastly, and nothing you can do at the time, but the overcast, diffused light isn't adding much either - It's not hurting mind you, but also not helping. If that makes sense.
For me, in situations and conditions like this, I would look for more intimate comps. Zoom in on the water, patterns, etc. Or, if the rock formation above the stream is of interest, get a more intimate view of just the rock. Isolate and simplify when the grand view just isn't there.
Lon