Permian

Captured this image in1997, at Highlands Hammock State Park, near Sebring Florida.

A hammock (this hammock anyway) is a small section of slightly higher ground surrounded by swamp.

Being slightly higher, it's also slightly dryer, allowing for vegetation that you might not find in the lower and wetter swamp surrounding it.

Being in a sub or semi tropical area like Florida means the plants you find there are characteristic of that type of climate rather than the more temperate one further North. That sub or semi tropical climate is what Geology tells us existed through much of The Permian Era, some two or three hundred million years ago. The hammocks are surrounded by boardwalks, and the boardwalks are accessed through open doorway type gates. You walk through the gates and you (I did anyway) get the distinct impression that you've stepped back in time, two or three hundred million years to one of those Permian Era Swamps. It's that impression I was trying to capture with this image, and no I was not eating magic mushrooms or smoking funny cigarettes at the time.

To be honest, I'm not sure what the value to you is of getting critiques on a photo you took 13 years ago. In the sense of providing you with any new learning opportunities now. I may be wrong but the only value I can see to you is drawing member's attention to your photo, which is not the purpose of the 'seeking critique' thread.

I also note that you have no photos in your portfolio. In general, uploading photos to your portfolio and ticking the 'request critique' box is a good way to get general feedback, rather than posting each one separately in the 'seeking critique' thread'.

But FWIW, here's my feedback. Ignoring your background info for the moment, there's a lot I really like about this photo: the backlighting, contrasts, repetition of the leaf fans, backlit tree, the hazy/steamy air in the background, etc. So it's - at least for me - a visually interesting photo that has plenty of 'atmosphere'. Although (without your background info) the photo could have been shot anywhere at any time, it does to me convey the message of 'atmospheric, tangled, chaotic and wild vegetation'. So to that extent, I think you achieved your goal. But since the photo could have been taken yesterday at many locations around the world, the photo in itself doesn't suggest 'stepping back in time' to me. It's just a good example of a 'wetland vegetation' photo.

Suggestions for improvement (for your consideration):

• This digital image is relatively low-res (500 x 750 px). I can't see the original scanned resolution but I suspect that it was higher. I would have liked to see a higher-res image for reviewing. For example: 2000x3000 px. This would have allowed me to zoom in more closely on the details.
  
  

• Even at this low -res, some scanning 'artifacts' are noticeable: white spots and white scratches/hairs; these can be removed/reduced in PP (Photoshop, which from the metadata, I see you use)
  
  

• I don't know what the lighting conditions were or how film photographers adjust for the 'exposure triangle'. Ideally, I would have liked to see the foremost 'fan' somewhat more sharply in focus = greater DOF
  
  
• I may be wrong, but it's worth considering whether your goal with this image might perhaps have been better served with a landscape orientation. In the sense that IHMO a landscape-orientation often conveys the wider 'scene' better than a portrait orientation
  
  

To be honest, I'm not sure what the value to you is of getting critiques on a photo you took 13 years ago. In the sense of providing you with any new learning opportunities now. I may be wrong but the only value I can see to you is drawing member's attention to your photo, which is not the purpose of the 'seeking critique' thread.

The reason I’ve sometimes asked for critique on photos I took a long time ago are various ...

1. I consider my work as a whole in gestalt terms. I’m often going through older images to see if they can now work into the vision I’ve developed since taking them. I’m interested in getting feedback on those just as much as new photos, because they’re going into an evolving portfolio. Though Izzy doesn’t have a formal portfolio here, I’ve seen enough of his work to now be able to put each photo into at least some context.
    
   
2. I appreciate critiques not just for the photo in question but for how I can put comments to use going forward, so it doesn’t matter when I took the photo since all comments can help me for future photo making.
   
3. Some critiques center on post processing, which often has been done more recently even on photos taken a while back. That can still be helpful for my post processing approach to an older photo.
   
4. My guess is there are more valid reasons one would do this.
   

____________________

The photo itself has elements of Izzy’s other works so I can see why he might be drawn to it. From your words, Izzy, I gather you were trying to capture an almost mythical or prehistoric feel. There’s potential here for that but I think it would need to be brought out more. My first impression is simply that it’s a jumble. You also have a lot of glare and haze to work with. I’d figure out how to work with those things, though I think the jumble quality could be reduced if desired. When I think of past millennia or pre-historic or mythological type references, I often think “bigger than life.” That can be expressed through a sense of shape, grandeur, abstraction, symbol, icon, etc. I’d think about any of these as a potential way to express what you’re after.

I accept the validity of your points, Sam. I'm fami'critliar with Gestalt so I understand where you're/ coming from. Just personally, I neither don't have the time nor attention span to maintain a sense of continuity between photos posted for critique by 's the same member. I usually take the trouble to compare the current photo with others in the requestor's portfolio. And yes, I could browse through all the requestor's previous posts on PN to find any - for me - make it easier to target my critique. As a general point, I also think that - while avoiding steering critiques in a certain direction - asking questions on where a requestor wants feedback on can make the critiques more meaningful and relevant.More than "I shot this photo - what do you think"?

The reason I’ve sometimes asked for critique on photos I took a long time ago are various ...

1. I consider my work as a whole in gestalt terms. I’m often going through older images to see if they can now work into the vision I’ve developed since taking them. I’m interested in getting feedback on those just as much as new photos, because they’re going into an evolving portfolio. Though Izzy doesn’t have a formal portfolio here, I’ve seen enough of his work to now be able to put each photo into at least some context.
    
   
2. I appreciate critiques not just for the photo in question but for how I can put comments to use going forward, so it doesn’t matter when I took the photo since all comments can help me for future photo making.
   
3. Some critiques center on post processing, which often has been done more recently even on photos taken a while back. That can still be helpful for my post processing approach to an older photo.
   
4. My guess is there are more valid reasons one would do this.
   

____________________

The photo itself has elements of Izzy’s other works so I can see why he might be drawn to it. From your words, Izzy, I gather you were trying to capture an almost mythical or prehistoric feel. There’s potential here for that but I think it would need to be brought out more. My first impression is simply that it’s a jumble. You also have a lot of glare and haze to work with. I’d figure out how to work with those things, though I think the jumble quality could be reduced if desired. When I think of past millennia or pre-historic or mythological type references, I often think “bigger than life.” That can be expressed through a sense of shape, grandeur, abstraction, symbol, icon, etc. I’d think about any of these as a potential way to express what you’re after.

I neither don't have the time nor attention span to maintain a sense of continuity between photos posted for critique by 's the same member.

That’s fine and I’m not necessarily expecting you to. I was hoping that, by giving you a bunch of valid reasons why someone would post an old photo for critique, you would be able to simply critique photos on face value even when they’re older. Just critique the photo as you would any other, whether that means as part of a body of work or as an individual. Your critiques are often helpful and insightful, so I encourage you to continue doing so without worrying too much about when it was taken.

As a general point, I also think that - while avoiding steering critiques in a certain direction - asking questions on where a requestor wants feedback on can make the critiques more meaningful and relevant.More than "I shot this photo - what do you think"?

Agree for the most part. That’s why I used Izzy’s intro to critique towards his desire to capture the history of the garden. On the other hand, some photographers might not yet be in tune enough even to know what they want specific help with, so I understand when someone simply asks, “What do you think?” That leaves a wide opening for them to get all kinds of feedback going in different directions, which might just help turn on some light bulbs for them that they hadn't even considered.

Thankyou!

As for my reasons for posting these older images is basically to find out if I got what I wanted.

This image for example. The impression that I got walking around that hammock of stepping back in time.

That was the impression I got from actually being there, seeing it, and walking around in it.

I took the picture hoping to capture that impression. I think I did, but that's me. So I post the image along with

the background information to find out if it's just me, or can others see it too.

In other words, Did I succeed in capturing that impression and transmitting it successfully to the viewer.

In this case it was the feeling of stepping back in time.

In the case of "Other World" it was that other worldly feeling of the location.

In the case of "Morning Ferry" it was that feeling of calm.

Etc.

To be honest, I'm not sure what the value to you is of getting critiques on a photo you took 13 years ago. In the sense of providing you with any new learning opportunities now. I may be wrong but the only value I can see to you is drawing member's attention to your photo, which is not the purpose of the 'seeking critique' thread.

 

I also note that you have no photos in your portfolio. In general, uploading photos to your portfolio and ticking the 'request critique' box is a good way to get general feedback, rather than posting each one separately in the 'seeking critique' thread'. Mike

As I indicated in my earlier response, the value to me is simply did I capture that feeling or sense of place, time, whatever, etcetera, I was going for?

Aside from that. There're two galleries associated with my account. "Mr and Mrs Izzy" which I created when I joined, and "Single Images", which I don't recall creating, but there it is, so either I created it or it was created by default when I joined. Are either of those the portfolio you mention?

Hi, @MrAndMrsIzzy, I stand corrected and I hope my critique was useful to you given your aim.

On your profile page, there's a Tab "'Portfolio" which shows a link to your (portfolio) Homepage. As you can see, no photos or galleries are shown on your portfolio homepage. This may be due to a PN technical glitch, but your portfolio is now essentially "empty".

Maybe this is something you want to look into, maybe not. I'd just like to see a few more examples of more recent photography:).

Best wishes,

Mike

As I indicated in my earlier response, the value to me is simply did I capture that feeling or sense of place, time, whatever, etcetera, I was going for?

 

Aside from that. There're two galleries associated with my account. "Mr and Mrs Izzy" which I created when I joined, and "Single Images", which I don't recall creating, but there it is, so either I created it or it was created by default when I joined. Are either of those the portfolio you mention?

Hi, @MrAndMrsIzzy, I stand corrected and I hope my critique was useful to you given your aim.

 

On your profile page, there's a Tab "'Portfolio" which shows a link to your (portfolio) Homepage. As you can see, no photos or galleries are shown on your portfolio homepage. This may be due to a PN technical glitch, but your portfolio is now essentially "empty". Best wishes, Mike

Yes! Both yours and Steve's.

As for the "Portfolio", I was under the misunderstanding that "portfolio" and "gallery" were two terms for the same thing. For whatever it's worth I took a look, tried a test upload and remove, and it seemed to work, so I'll be looking into that a little further. I also tried to upload to the "Mr and Mrs Izzy" gallery. That didn't quite work. Don't know what the problem was (me, the gallery, some combination of the two), but I'll be taking a look at that too