Unfortunately, "Solitude" has been taken. ;-)

This image is offered in response to James Fazio's recent contribution. The concept is virtually the same, though I think my composition works a little better. If only I could un-do the ~1 stop overexposure, and maybe ditch that cloud, and wind back the Sun to be closer to sunrise ... ah well.

Taken on the morning of 1998 August 21 just below Sunset Point in Bryce Canyon National Park.

-- Matthew Francey (mdf@my-dejanews.com), September 30, 1998

Answers

Matt - hey - while the lighting would be killer at sunrise, I still think this is an interesting image. The clould helps fill up some negative space IMHO. However, with the brightness in the lower RH corner - your eye is kinda pulled right away from the tree and off the page.

The lower angle of the sun would also help pull out the detail and texture of the surrounding rocks.

Mark

-- Mark (Grafphojto@aol.com), September 30, 1998.

The darkening of the sky in the upper right is distracting. The deep blue sky and the darkening effect at right angles from the sun (at least as far as I can tell from the shadows) make it look like you might have used a polarizer.

Also, while the composition doesn't have the same "problems" as James Fazio's recent contribution, the roots or fallen tree or whatever that is lying horizontal is distracting...it's scale is too big compared to the slightly smaller tree. What were you trying to show? Perhaps it would have been more effective to get closer with a wider lens and really exaggerate a difference or else get closer and crop out some of the horizontal stuff.

Even at a different scale, IMHO the big, messy horizontal stuff seems incongruent with your effort to make a nice composition of two basic, minimal components.

-- Andrew Y. Kim (andy_roo@mit.edu), October 01, 1998.

First off, I like this image. The could is realy doing something for the image, so don't get rid of it! ;)

As for 'the horizontal stuff', it doesn't bother me that much. Maybe a composition where the root leads diagonally from lower lower right corner to the tree would be something, but then the light on the tree would be the same...

But I like it as it is.

-- Fredrik Mvrk (fmork@yahoo.com), October 02, 1998.

The composition is fine, it is graphically dynamic and without the horizontal root and earth the image would die. I'm not at all sure that such a simple composition would benenfit much from the color shift or shadows of early or late light. The image is one of starkness and the bald sky and midday light seem to emphasize it.

Frank

-- Frank Kolwicz (bb389@lafn.org), October 02, 1998.

If the photographer can be permitted to critique his own work ...

I agree with Frank's assessment re: removing the "horizontal stuff" would kill the image. I'm not so sure about the lighting though, but I will defer to his Higher Authority on that. Perhaps I should have used negative film? I usually switch from slide to negative once the light gets a bit too intense; yet another operator error (like the +1 overexposure due to forgetting to reset the compensation dial from a previous scene)?

Regarding the comments on the polarizer, getting close, etc. The camera was below the level of the root, and the lens aimed up about 30-45 degrees. This view point was deliberately chosen to construct a "fake" horizon that blocked out irrelevant elements in the distance. (You can still see a few pixels of it at the lower right). A 20mm lens was used. The root was about 0.75m from the film plane, and the tree's canopy (such as it is) is maybe 3m away. You can't get much closer than that. Alternative viewpoints were possible, but dangerous: to the left, right and behind the tree is a ~30m vertical drop, and the local terrain is loose rock.

This is one of the few images I've captured that was visualized from a distance [from the overlook, looking down, I saw the tree and the access and the framing popped into my head], and when I arrived on scene, it "clicked" once I looked through the viewfinder.

I rather wish they were all that way.

-- Matthew Francey (mdf@my-dejanews.com), October 02, 1998.

I like this picture because I think I tried to take an interesting photo of this tree and failed horribly when I had my shot at it. This is a very interesting take on the subject. Its too bad the light wasn't slightly more on the warm side.

-- Peter Su (psu@jprc.com), October 02, 1998.