Sagittaria kurziana. 6x6 velvia, Polarizer. North Florida.

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), January 18, 2000

Answers

This is a very interesting image but it would be much stronger if you crop the top third to almost completely eliminate the stream bank. The reflection of the sky and the trees in the water is muck more interesting that the originals. This is a very good use of a polarizer.

-- Carroll Hughes (hughescck@citcom.net), January 18, 2000.

It's a nice shot.

Judging by your email address it looks as if you might be in the position to return to make a better one. Consider a polarizing filter to reduce the glare. Composition could stand improvement as well. If you crop as suggested above I feel that you will have lost much of the effect of the flowing green. Can you reposition so as to remove the distracting foreground (on the right) while preserving the sweeping foliage effect. Two compositional changes come to mind: 1. an in focus foreground subject on the right. 2. Similar composition to what your have posted but a.) eliminate the distraction and b.) present the grass "up close and personal". (Can you tilt that 6x6?) With this later approach, the "flowing green" subject will dominate; as is, the lower right distraction and your distance from the would-be dominant subject comprimise your image.

Don't get me wrong, I like it! Tweak it a bit and I'll love it!

-- Eric James (eajames@u.washington.edu), January 18, 2000.

Interesting. I think that since it is not an abstract the bank and sky is needed, as well as the foregrond bank which helps to define the water. The bank and strean are just not too interesting. How about shooting again in the spring when the bank and trees are in bloom?

-- Micheal F. Kelly (radiant@gci.net), January 19, 2000.

I like the effect of keeping the glare that is there. The suggestion to crop has merit, but this is the 6x6 format and part of that is thinking square. If you crop it, I think you might feel you're stinking out a bit, no? Perhaps a return, if possible, and a view towards the right, or tilt the camera down a bit to get less of the bank. Having said that, I think the image is fine as it is, I am just trying to make it more abstract than it really is. Good show however you paln to rework it. But, all your work is good from what you have shown here.

-- Chris Gillis (cagillis@concentric.net), January 19, 2000.

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments! Here is another view of the same scene. Better? Worse?

-- Larry Korhnak (lvk@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu), January 19, 2000.

Loved the first shot. Don't change a thing. Your instict was right. Use the force, Luke. Oops wrong thread. ;>

-- Keith Clark (clarkphotography@spiritone.com), January 19, 2000.

Hi,

Got your response. Thanks for having a sense of humor.

The first image is very dymamic, strong. The diagonal implies movement which seems apropriate for a stream... It also uses perspective to draw the viewer into the scene. The reds and browns contrast nicely with the greens and blues of the reeds and reflections on the water.

Having seen a lot of your here in this forum I "sensed" (;>) you knew the first image was much better, which is why I made the silly comment above.

If I had to find something to "ding" the image on, I'd say "More shadow detail along the bank would be nice".

Happy shooting,

Keith

-- Keith Clark (clarkphotography@spiritone.com), January 19, 2000.