aral Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Browsing through landscape photos one can hardly find a photo that would have foreground only at the upper part of the image. Usually the immediate foreground is at the lower part. There may be some good reasons for this - the image with no foreground on the lower part might seem "floating in the air". My question is if you are aware of some good landscape images with foreground in the upper part of the image? Is it possible to push the effect to extreme and still get a good image? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_dorcich1 Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 So a landscape with the sky obscured with a floating foreground element? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightrasp1664881197 Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 tree branches, bodies falling from buildings??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_e Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Do you mean a photograph that is nothing but foreground...or just, you know, the ground at your feet (or tripod)...or whatever gets defined as "foreground" -- the first 20 feet in front the camera comprising the whole frame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fate_faith_change_chains Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Looking through some of my older stuff, this was the only somewhat upper foreground kinda landscape I found. It may be just a case of changing viewpoints, getting lower or higher than usual and maybe getting closer too.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aral Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share Posted November 14, 2007 What I mean is this. These two photos do have immediate foreground at the upper part of the image http://www.photo.net/photo/6554832, http://www.photo.net/photo/5389874. According to my abilities to make a good photo, thee two did reasonably well at critique forum. But is there a really stunning fine art example?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aral Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share Posted November 14, 2007 and this one<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerrySiegel Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 See my thoughts right under your mountain shot. I have some problems with the balance and focus of the framing bunch of leaves above. I can't verbalize what my mind says, but it kind of 'competes' with your main subject. Which is...what? I presume it is the twin mountain peak and snowfall. As gray and flat the peaks are, the bright leaves get a lot of prominence,but essentially I think you meant them to be a frame not the focal subject. (I hope this makes some sense.) Thanks for the question. I see movies that use foreground blur to create mood and sense of depth without detracting from center of interest, so it can be done,sometimes a silouhette is enough in foreground. It has to be done in a particular way is what I am suggesting. Or it does look dissonant, best word I can come up with. Thanks for asking the Q. gs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerrySiegel Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Second shot works better. Yet the focal interest is still a little overwhelmed by the silhouetted branches. It is still a successful shot. I think you are aiming to improve,thus my essentially critical nits. Be well,gs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roseberry guitars Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Hello Ales, I think these two examples are quite successful. One specific thing to look at that might improve them is the placement of the main subject. For me, I find that centering the subject(s) can, but not always, take away from the point of interest. Being in-tune with where one wants to lead the viewers eye will create a more successful picture. I like photos that take my eye on a journey into the photo to discover the main point of interest. The foreground in the upper part of the photo can be very effective in doing this. A few example photos from a fellow Photonet member and one whose work I have found very informative: http://www.photo.net/photo/5249102 http://www.photo.net/photo/4458479 http://www.photo.net/photo/4483811 http://www.photo.net/photo/3123533 This is just a few photos from one person on our site and many more can be found with a little time spent looking through and studying the portfolios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreemanphotography Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 I have seen some pictures with upper foregrounds which I think are quite successful. One, although not necessarily a landscape, was of some brightly colored leaves in the top of the frame with the sillouhette of a man walking his dog on a foggy day in the lower portion of the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_e Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Ales are you attempting to make upper foreground the "focal point", "main subject", "point of interest" of your photographs, or are you using it in the traditional way as a framing device for such? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now