Untitled

No words. It's that good. You should be so very proud of yourself.

Everyone before me has said it, but I have to repeat that it is a magnificent photo - a wall hanger! A competition winner. Congratulations.

Amazing photo. The only thing that bugs me is the fact that it's your picture and not mine! Very well done. Regards.

At first I thought its a painting!

WOW, its a wonderful picture! And you nailed the scene with a perfect timing, lighting and probably a lot of patience!

 

-Narendra

Please note the following:

 

This image has been selected for discussion. It is not necessarily the "best" picture

the Elves have seen this week, nor is it a contest.

 

Discussion of photo.net policy, including the choice

of Photograph of the Week should not take place here, but in the Site Feedback forum.

 

The About

Photograph of the Week

page tells you more about this feature of photo.net.

 

Before writing a contribution to this thread, please consider our reason for having

this forum: to help people learn about photography. Visitors have browsed the gallery,

found a few striking images and want to know things like why is it a good picture, why

does it work? Or, indeed, why doesn't it work, or how could it be improved? Try to answer

such questions with your contribution.

 

Wow! What a beautiful, strange and evocative photograph. I'd be really curious about the story behind its capture--at night, under a bright moon, over a few minutes at least, would be my guess. The shadow detail is great, even in the inside of the boat (where the patch of snow might have helped kick some light up into that dark shadow).

My only criticism was going to be that I'd like to see the boat more prominent in the foreground. The best landscape photogs always have something interesting right up front, so close that you feel like you could reach out and touch it. And, indeed, the detail of the boat would work well for that. It could be shot that way.

But then I reconsidered. I'm not sure that the snow in the foreground isn't necessary to add to the bleakness and coldness of the image. First of all, it establishes that the viewer is looking at snow, and not, say, sand. Also, giving a little distance to the boat makes it seem--I don't know--stranded, and a little more out of place. A little more lonely?

Still, I'd like to see a little more something in the immediate foreground. Maybe lower the camera angle closer to the snow and find a line to lead the eye to the boat and beyond.

All that being said, I think the image is super as shot. I'm sure it was darker than it looks and that it was a task just to create this great image as the photographer has done.

My congratulations, Geir, on a beautiful and unique image. I'm looking forward to seeing more of your work.

 

Fred

I think I agree with everything Fred said. As for the tech. details, Geir might chime in and say what the exposure time was; but, given the star movement and the focal length I think this is taken at, I'd say about 90 seconds.

Have you ever thought of trying it in black and white. I think it would add to the story that the photo is telling

Beautiful image, i think strenght is in composition and impression it gives with this light.

Wow, what an atmospheric scene; you can feel the cold and hear the silence.

 

Any further info, Geir, on how you achieved the result...Straight out of the camera or any processing beyond the basic controls?

 

David

This has to be a moonlit scene, to produce the shadow in the boat. The star trails and the glittering of the snow add a magical quality, and the light on the horizon is simply magnificent. Might this be a sunrise scene? If so, I can imagine the photographer trudging out there in the cold, dark night, waiting for the right moment.

agree with Fred.

 

If exposure is a minute plus, the sun is setting (stars trail indicate north to upper right? i.e sun in west) then how come the snow is 'fixed' i.e seems to be suspended? I would expect snow trails. Also would expect snow against the black background.

 

Either a stobe was used (as mentioned above) or the snow was added in PS.

 

I agree with the foreground discussion above, i.e lower angle or closer to boat. However this would remove the glow of the sun which is a key part of this picture. This is also the reason why I do not think that converting it to B&W is the right thing to do.

 

It's an image that would not have occured to me to take and I keep wondering if the photographer expected this outcome or was just experimenting. Would like to know the background to the image.

I can't believe my photo is chosen as Photograph of the Week !?

First of all: Thanks to all for nice feedback, comments and suggestions!

About the shot: I shot this a late evening January 2006. It was a very cold night (about 10 degrees below zero I guess). The new moon was not giving me much light. I used a headlight when walking around. When shooting in low-light conditions I often determine the exposure-time by checking the histogram. This shot is very much over-exposed compared to the light I was experiencing that night. In this case the exp.time is 80 sec. at f/5,6 400 ISO.

 

The orange light you see in the background is city-lights reflecting in low clouds. I shot many pictures this evening and some of them have become my best selling pictures ever.

 

Again - Thank you very much everybody !

 

-Geir-

I like the way the snowfall glistens as a balance to the stars. This is how I like to remember a fresh snowfall,rather than have to work outdoors with a cold tripod in freezing weather as you did. It is a picture postcard composition,with a balance of all the right elements. I have marveled more than once at how moonlight skims off the tops of trees in a ghostly pattern is at does here. Thanks for sharing this scene as I watch from a more temperate latitude. But I remember when the woods looked enchanting like this....all it needs is some Tchaikovsky ballet music:-) Nice. Very nice image. I can see why this would sell too. How about a 16 by 20 for photonet subscribers at a discount? Just kidding. Be well, Geir. You deserve the choice. The Elvers are not always obscure in their choices...gs

This is not a fresh snowfall. What is glistening is frost. The snow is actually quite old, since some of it has apparently sublimated (gone directly from solid to gas, as in eroding ice cubes in the freezer compartment of a refrigerator). Thus can one see bare spots where there is no snow at all.

 

This is a fine shot, Geir, although I can only imagine what it was like to be working at those temperatures. The entire folder is fine work. Congratulations on having the photo selected. The composition is excellent, and the colors are sublime.

 

--Lannie

A Christmas time is here! I also like other versions of this theme.

The sparkling frost is magical, the scene is idyllic. I would try to take that kind of scene with ISO 100 so that I could get longer star trails and darker sky.

I'm giving 7/7!

This is a great shot! Technically right on. I agree with the above about the composition. To me it is lacking a strong foreground element and a subject. The boat sort of blends in with the snow and the grasses. My eye keeps going to the trees. I feel the strong contrast with the white frost and the dark blue of the sky make them stand out. I like the contrast and how they look, but I don?t think the trees were the intended subject. Cool photo, I think there is a better one with the boat more pronounced in Geir's portfolio.

I Like the photo. Good work. My personal taste is that stars are either spots or longer trails rather than short lines like you have captured. But otherwise I really like it.

 

GH

I like this picture a lot ! The sparkle from the frost is perfect. It's almost like a painting but not.

Stunning. For anyone who's made the effort to be out in the wild at night - this really captures the atmosphere perfectly.

 

John.

This image puzzles me. If I understand correctly, the artist asserts that this is a "straight" photography and, as far as I've read, all the published comments take it to be such a "capture." Yet there is no EXIF data attached to the image and all the relevant "details" fields state "unknown" about the making of this image. Further, the image's dynamic range and the seemingly inconsistent shadows cast by the boat, trees, and other objects suggest significant graphic arts manipulation. I'd appreciate a more specific explanation from the artist of how this striking image was crafted. After all, we all wish to better master our craft here, no?

"This shot is very much over-exposed compared to the light I was experiencing that night. In this case the exp.time is 80 sec. at f/5,6 400 ISO." --Geir Kakvatn (posted above)

 

Pat, see the others in this folder. This was an eighty-second exposure in the dead of the Norwegian winter night, with light from a new crescent moon.

Dear friends, again - thank you for all response to my photo!

I can assure you there is no "significant graphic arts manipulation" in this picture. Of course I've adjusted colors, brightness, contrast, sharpness etc. in the RAW-editor (and later in Photoshop), but not anything I would charaterize as manipulation. Of course I have the CANON RAW-file to prove it, but I don't dare to send it to people I don't know to well. I guess you understand !?

 

-Geir-

Thanks, Geir, for your clarification on the limited degree to which your striking image was manipulated. As Phil Greenspun says in his "Definition of Unmanipulated" (http://photo.net/photodb/manipulation), "In other words, to produce a image like yours, do they need to work on their camera technique or their Photoshop technique?" I agree with Phil that the answer to this question is crucial for our learning more effective image making.

A very captivating image which calls for a long time of contemplation.

Just would like to know which one the camera and lens you used for it. And if time exposure was 47 sec or 80 sec, as you mentioned in two different replies. Thank you so much for sharing this.

Marielou