Gallery: LandscapePosted June 9, 2013149 views9 comments
Hi folks,
going back to my 2010 archived photo
Canon 5DMKII, 17-40mm, F/16, ISO50, ND + CPL
all the comments are welcome
thanks in advance
Comments
9 comments
Comment posted by Hamed Musharbak on June 9, 2013 at 6:12 AM
brighter version
Registered on June 1, 2009, 372 Posts, 2282 Comments
Comment posted by Jose Fernandez on June 9, 2013 at 6:59 AM
In my monitor the brighter version look better Hamed, nice compostion.
Registered on July 25, 2011, 77 Posts, 172 Comments
Comment posted by Bill Reid on June 9, 2013 at 8:40 AM
Beautiful image Hamed. I like your composition and the long exposure for the water. Well done.
Registered on January 27, 2013, 65 Posts, 2460 Comments
Comment posted by Brad Strong on June 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM
Hamed,
This doesn't do a lot for me. The motion blur in the sky is too much for my liking. The colors and textures between the sky and ocean are too similar. The lighting isn't great either. I expect the sky to steel the show here, but it doesn't. The composition seems nice though.
Registered on October 1, 2012, 43 Posts, 302 Comments
Comment posted by Mark Metternich on June 9, 2013 at 1:21 PM
You will certainly go crazy around water!!! Nice shot bro!
Registered on June 19, 2009, 276 Posts, 6240 Comments
Comment posted by Lon Overacker on June 9, 2013 at 2:28 PM
Hamed,
I think the lighter version certainly brings out the rock detail more and also the golds in the lower rock show better. The sky and sea look good in both. I really like the framing with the rock and the color in both the sky and water; cloud motion doesn't bother me here, although sometimes it can be too much. The only thing that really doesn't ring for me is the smoothing out of the water. Yeah, the color is great, but without any wave action, texture, etc., the water is someone empty. But that's the only minor thing here.
Lon
Registered on November 24, 2006, 521 Posts, 19147 Comments
Comment posted by Mike Dawson on June 9, 2013 at 3:23 PM
It all works for me, the 2nd version a bit better than first
Registered on February 4, 2006, 364 Posts, 8872 Comments
Comment posted by Stan Rose on June 9, 2013 at 9:39 PM
I'm not really crazy about the water-looking-like-smoke look, but it's a interesting composition. The rocks on the right side are a bit dark next to the sunlight--i get the impression you processed this in 2010 and haven't revised it since, and you're much better now than you were back then.
Registered on September 15, 2005, 836 Posts, 17099 Comments
Comment posted by Vance Gese on June 9, 2013 at 11:57 PM
Love the silky water and the nice curve of the rock formations as well as the textures in the foreground. Outstanding. Do prefer your second rendition.
Registered on November 13, 2008, 298 Posts, 6629 Comments
Comments
9 commentsThis doesn't do a lot for me. The motion blur in the sky is too much for my liking. The colors and textures between the sky and ocean are too similar. The lighting isn't great either. I expect the sky to steel the show here, but it doesn't. The composition seems nice though.
I think the lighter version certainly brings out the rock detail more and also the golds in the lower rock show better. The sky and sea look good in both. I really like the framing with the rock and the color in both the sky and water; cloud motion doesn't bother me here, although sometimes it can be too much. The only thing that really doesn't ring for me is the smoothing out of the water. Yeah, the color is great, but without any wave action, texture, etc., the water is someone empty. But that's the only minor thing here.
Lon