Foxglove and lagoon

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Nature Photography Image Critique : One Thread



-- Guy Tal (guy@spyra.com), July 15, 1998

Answers

This was taken on one of the first days of spring in California this year. Equipment used was: Nikon EM, 24mm/2.8 handheld. Film was Fuji Velvia.

Guy Spyra Nature Photography Project (http://www.spyra.com)

-- Guy Tal (guy@spyra.com), July 15, 1998.


Guy,

It's a beautiful image. Great saturation and focus.

Too much sky for -my- tastes though. I personally find blue skies boring. More clouds would have made it more interesting (to me :>). But then we almost never see blue skies here. ;>

The single foxglove seems out of place. It needs to be balanced somehow by something else that's missing. Again, clouds could have helped. (Add some in Photoshop, or clone out the flower, just for experimentation, and you'll see what I mean). The image seems too heavily weighted on the right side as a result.

As a graphic element the single foxglove could have impact but in that case you would need more space above it in order to drop in a headline.

I love the lake itself, and foxgloves, which are still in season here as well. I think this scene would look beter minus the flower and with clouds in the sky.

Just my personal feeling. You have a good eye, and I like your website, espicially "Fog Over Clear Lake".

Best Wishes, Keith Clark

-- Keith Clark (ClarkPhotography@spiritone.com), July 15, 1998.


I tend to share Keith's feelings on this too. I find the Foxglove is lonely. It seems to be standing looking at the scenery behind it. The tall stature of it demands attention, but then so too does the background. The yellow-orange streak also grabs my attention. If you divide the image vertically in half, then the flower in its half looks better.

-- Paul Lenson (lenson@pci.on.ca), July 15, 1998.

the concept here was excellent. the image almost makes it. but you needed more depth of field to sharpen everything in the frame. and i have to wonder about the nature of the yellow strip in the lower 1/4 of the image. guy, by failing to express total joy at the initial viewing of your photograph, i trust that you take no personal umbrage at the well-meant and mature constructive criticisms humbly offered by

yr obvt svt a. wayne harrison

-- a. wayne harrison (wayno@netmcr.com), July 15, 1998.


No personal umbrage taken. I trully appreciate all your responses. You are right about the DOF. I had to practically walk into a blackberry bush to get the shot so a tripod was not an option. The yellow strip, unfortunately (or maybe not) was formed by a light leak due to deteriorating foam in my EM (I had just bought it as a backup body and this was my test roll).

-- Guy Tal (guy@spyra.com), July 15, 1998.


I like the foxglove in this photo. I think that if it were a large evergreen tree that everyone would love it because that is what is the typical photo. Whether you intended it to look like a evergreen is not important, but I really think it is a creative composition, and one not often seen. I bet that was a wonderful day. ~Jim

-- James Fazio (natureboy@vt.edu), July 15, 1998.

I like this phot a lot. The flower makes it, as it provides depth and scale. Without it, it would be boring. With it, it has foreground to background interest.

-- Paulo Bizarro (pbizarro@expro.pt), July 16, 1998.

I like this photo, mainly because of it's feeling and composition. It feels as if I was right there. The composition is unusual, striking and for me it works. ... Another point ... there is something vaaast, endless and joyful to the summer sky on bright days. This picture has captured it - is it the color, or the composition ... I don't know. Congratulations.

-- Jana Mullerova (jam@terma.com), July 16, 1998.

I like this shot quite a bit - it is the type of photo that I try to take myself. However, I think it could have been a lot better. First of all, I find the foxglove to dark/sheded by itself - maybe it is the scan or my moniter. If not, it could be lightened with a touch of fill flash, or perhaps by putting something refelective on the ground to bounce some light from below on it. Second, I agree that there is too much plain blue sky. I find plain clear blue skies my personal bane - the whether around here is either totally cloudy, abysmally hazy, or clear blue - never a nice scattering of puffy white clouds and clear blue behind. One thing you might get away with is to position your camera a little bit higher and point it down slightly to maintain the framing of the foxglove. That way more of your picture will be the grass & lagoon, and less will be sky. Of course, if you do too much, the foxglove will appear to lean towards the camera, ruining the shot. I suppose a view camera might be of assistance, but I don't have any experience in that field.

-- Mark Muller (muller@vibes.ae.utexas.edu), July 16, 1998.

I agree with Keith that the picture would look nicer without the big vertical flower in front, horizontal format, and much less blue sky. I don't if it is just me, but blue skies are almost (not quite) as boring as an overcast sky. Nevertheless, still a very nice picture!

-- Carlos Co (co@che.udel.edu), July 19, 1998.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ