Untitled

I appreciate the possible explanations for the bi-colored trunks. I've never lived in a hardwood forest, so this is beyond my experience. John, I admit that I do my gardening before the photo is taken. Although I probably would have avoided this small tree entirely if possible, if it had been included it would have had a substantial trimming first (just expediting a natural process). The large, single leaf that has hung up on the branches would have had assistance in reaching the earth.

And our paths crossed once again, but in time for an edit: I would have done the same with the broken branch. Natural pruning happens, but it's slow, and I want to get the photo and move on. Some consider such "artificial" trimming to be a violation, but I don't; I'm just speeding up a natural process.

What Stephen is referring to as " The, large single Leaf" upon further inspection looks the wrong shape to be a leaf. It looks reminiscent of a strip of birch bark hung up in the twigs. Something which I cannot be certain of but something which I see all the time in the forest. If this were to be the case, then it would beg the question, why is it the same colour as the leaves?

Gordon, it does appear to have a stem attached to it, maybe a leaf from a different tree(seems shaped like a maple maybe)--and just caught in the bramble? I guess it might be wrong to assume, but if you are going to color something that just looks wrong in the first place, why not clone it out? I don't think it is unusual, just intrusive.

Good question John, however I am not the one able to provide the answer. This image : Photo by Photographer Evgeni Donev - photo.net from the same folder as this week's POTW also asks a question which I could likewise not hope to answer. Why would a person paint in over-saturated colour in some parts of a black and white image and only paint in sections of the yarn leaving other sections B&W?

Here is another example from Evegeni's portfolio of a manipulated look which seems to my eye similarly unnatural in appearance, reminding me of the feel I get from those leaves above.

: Photo by Photographer Evgeni Donev - photo.net

These two are a bit different and I really can't explain the yarn one. This last is something we see a bit more often, blurring out the background, but otherwise I think the colors were there--maybe bumped some, but maybe not.

I have always said that the portfolio gives hints, especially about how a person approaches images and manipulation, but I still am not convinced we have an issue here--my enlargement of the image indicates variation in the color of most of the leaves and I don't see the spill over--even the "red-ening of the branches in front of some leaves seems more an optical phenomenon than a PS one (I couldn't find a blend mode that would cause the effect but have seen it in my own images). Here is a slice (100%) from a 150mb scanned 4x5 neg--no manipulation, of Aspen leaves--no detail here either.

John, I can see numerous differences between the natural appearance of your image of aspen leaves and the look of the ones in this weeks POTW. I guess we just have to agree to disagree as it seems pointless to continue down this path. I trust that you have a good eye and you may well be right. Regardless of the cause, it remains that my eye sees these leaves as unnatural and manipulated and you and Stephen see them as non manipulated. Either way we seem to be in partial agreement in as much as that they do not help the image.

I did of course realize that the background had been blurred in the second image. In linking to it I was referring to the unnatural colour. In the first linked image the orange is over saturated and clipping and in the second image the saturation is upped quite a bit, both look unnatural to me.

If this image is meant to show us just that longitudinal sharp demarcation of that tree ,(though there is another tree have an oblique irregular )in this foggy wood then it would merit worth of being POW,For the wonders of nature are so amazing no wonder how little they seems to be ,and how about it is not only doing that,it adds a very good details of a what I call ( Arrested Fall ) ,a term I used to addresses the photos that shows some fall leaves that fail to make their journey to the earth ,instead they hanged by some branches of the same tree where it passes to another form of decomposition,like been dried ,or being mottled by some fungi or partly eaten by insects and sometimes coloured so differently from those that fells in the ground,this is a kind of images that are showing that,and in addition it got some broken stem that have been arrested too.All of this Arrested Fall is shown in the image so very clearly as if it were in the sun while the real atmosphere is a foggy one .
this image have catches the soul of the wood and presented it to the viewers in a double view ,the sharp clear one ,and on other hand ,the hazy blurred view,all in a good composition,and so evidently with a very little manipulations or not at all ,otherwise he have levelled some details in that very close old stem in the foreground ,the only thing that I could talk about negatively in this photo,is the bad choice of its ugly frame.
Congratulation Evgeni for having this fine image of yours ,the so called prize of POW.

Dear friends, thank you for the useful discussions.
I have to excuse myself for several evidently mistakes in this my old photo – the ugly frame and the yellow patterns of leaves at the right bottom of the image. Obviously the color balance of the leaves was not very successful. The rest I prefer to leave the way it is.
As an amateur, the photography for me is only a way to spend my limited free time close to my “big love” – the nature. Obviously I have to spend more time following the useful discussions in the Photo Net forums – may be the best way to educate myself in the wonderful world of the photography.

simple ..yet so delightful !! well composed ..gud work keep up.

Are the selections for POW changing or is it just me?? When I first joined 1 year ago, it seemed to me that the POW was often very, very good - obviously so. Lately it seems that the Elves are selecting images that are more apt to promote discussion. Rather than being frustrated at this, as Brian seems to be, I think it's a marvelous development. This week again, the Elves have picked a very interesting image.

First off, this image impresses me. That's because Evgeni has made a composition I would never consider but the image is still emotional and evocative to me. When a photographer sees something I could not have seen, I'm immediately impressed....I'm being taught something. I would not have made this image because I would have been intellectually disturbed by the black line cutting straight through the middle of the frame. I think the small tree on the right being cut-off on the right side would also be a bit disturbing. But, in the end, both of these things don't destroy the emotional impact of the image for me, proving that my compositional eye is perhaps misguided here. The lesson this image teaches me then is to feel more and think less. Look at the whole, not just what might appear little imperfections in parts of the image. Assess the overall impact and don't destroy that impact in the name of "compositional perfection".

This means that here, the leaves, twigs, etc., that others have talked about don't bother me a bit. Leave them in I say, they are part of what makes the whole. But I just wonder about one thing. Is the dark trunk too dark? Would the image be a little easier to see if there was at least some detail in the black trunk? I 'd love to see a version with just a little detail here. Just enough that the black trunk becomes an authentic part of the image, rather than standing out as a what appears to me to be an artifact of the photographic process. I have seen Aspen go black as have others, but, to the naked eye, there is always some detail, especially on a foggy day.

In closing, I'd just like to thank the Elves, Evgeni and all the other POW recipients for the education. They put up with a lot of criticism from us. Best, JJ

I, too, would like to hear more discussion on how the single dark trunk that divides the frame affects people's reactions to the photo. It's not something I would have done, and it gets me to thinking about the restrictions I may be placing on my own photography (or maybe I just see and react to the world in my own particular way, and my photography simply reflects this). I thought the dark trunk was too "jarring," while John A. said he really liked the dark trunk splitting the frame. To me, that's an interesting difference. John and I don't especially care for the small tree on the right. I would have looked for a composition to exclude it, simply because I "want" the image to impart a particular message or feeling, and this small tree does not contribute to that goal. Jeremy, on the other hand, does not have this reservation about that particular element of the photo, again an interesting difference. I have a feeling that these differences are based on what we individually see in the photo, differences in how we interpret the photo, and a discussion based on these deeper differences would be more productive and interesting than trying to discern whether color in the leaves has been enhanced.

Is it the case that some viewers want the peace and calm that a deciduous forest in fog imparts (especially those who have stood in such a forest), while others may be more inclined to look for the artistic and aesthetic factors in the image itself and are therefore focusing less on the mood of the present image and less on past experiences of standing in this kind of forest (especially if they have never done so)? What are the other possibilities that I haven't even thought of? While I like to know what people think of an image, I'm even more interested in what those reactions to the image are based and therefore why they can differ so markedly among individuals.

I'll add another pitch to change this feature of photo.net to the "Critique of the Week." People are still missing the point, I believe, simply because of it's title. A title creates expectations, and if those expectations don't match the intent, then we get crossed wires and comments that are more appropriate in another forum. Offering congratulations to someone for being selected somewhat at random does not make much sense to me, and the problem (if you want to call this a problem) is only compounded by that little gold cup. I still smile at John A's suggestion from a couple of weeks ago of a purple heart symbol. A name change and a change in the symbol (if a symbol is even needed) is due, I believe.

Stephen Penland.
I have a feeling that these differences are based on what we individually see in the photo,
The different opinions came from experiences,whether photography ,life ,or both.and the reactions are different so much because we are different from each other so much,so as our experiences. but at photo.net we will get close reactions that does not apart from each others at the extreme point,cause all the viewers are connected by photography subject, we will get a far different reactions if we show the image to students or soldiers for example. and I agree with you about the title,it creates expectations and some times it leads to a certain point of view that is even irrelevant to the subject matter.
Offering congratulations.
For this you have to ask some one who haven't that yellow cup from the amateurs,if he or she eager to have it or not,may the professionals consider it of no value,and I have read in the past threads it is something useless,and I would say NO,Photo.net is also opened for the amateurs as well,(I belong to this group) and this yellow cup is a big and an extreme drive and motive for them ,just may be one of them may had it one day,I have received many congratulations my self of having this cup from my friends here in Iraq,and I have been envied for that as well,this is out side the US,if the Elves are going to change it ,or any other one suggest to changed it just think of peoples outside the States as well. I will tell you as well as the Elves a small secret ,I have been enjoyed and became happy with that yellow cup,exactly the same happiness that I have experienced when I got my Board Fellowship Degree in surgery 20 years ago.For the amateurs it is something that counts.that is why I have offered my congratulations to an amateur like me ,Evgeni. Last thing in my thoughts to put here and ask you kindly and the Elves too,In deciding anything as a suggestions ,ideas,and thoughts,Just think of us ,the amateurs as all the tutors thinks of their students. thank you Stephens for your public thoughts,which I appreciates so much.

First, I think Saad makes a good point about the cup and it really doesn't matter what this is called or the symbol for having been chosen, I think the intro is pretty clear about what we are supposed to do here. I also liked reading Evgeni's comments about this as well. Sometimes we forget that a person, a person learning and trying to improve, is on the other end of these discussions. I am not saying anything in particular should change, but I suppose we just need to be sure our comments aren't personal.

@Stephen--I don't think I said I don't like the little tree, in fact I think I said it was maybe a nice idea to juxtapose the chaotic youth against the serene elder, what I saw as problematic was the intrusion of the orphaned leaves, more the bottom ones, and then felt a careful cleanup of the large leaf and fallen stick could have maybe helped the image a bit.

Myself, I prefer this tree, the dark one, without detail and I do like it cutting the frame. In both cases it is because it gives you something unexpected and is a bold move. It breaks with conventional wisdom and serves to give us a "pattern interrupt" from what we expect to see and because of that, we think. I don't need the detail because I know what is hidden there, it is everywhere in this image elsewhere, so my mind can fill it in while its blackness helps put depth to the image(and can add some mystery), something too many fog shots don't ever do(which is fine, just more predictable). For me, I find it an elegant shape and not one that creates any disharmony within the image nor does it act to divide the image because it is so integral to the scene.

"What are the other possibilities that I haven't even thought of?" I have been a landscape photographer for over 30 years and yet I think I have not been overly friendly to most landscape or nature photographs presented here. The reason is that there are just too many of those pretty images that "capture nature" as it is and they seem to exist everywhere we look on these pages and elsewhere, without a lot of variation or individuality. I think it is great that someone enjoys making that type of image and that experience and their craft, but to answer this question, I personally want something more. I want to see something unique not from the landscape, but a viewpoint that makes me see, and consider, something new and different about what I am looking at. I don't think this is a great photograph, but I do like the effort here to do something different--but it is a nice image.

A short while back in a test users forum discussion on the POTW, I suggested that there seemed to have been a shift in the choice for POTW away from highly polished more professional images toward more ordinary photos. I was labeled a conspiracy nut by management and permanently kicked out of the forum. It was actually kind of a funny moment ..... nice to read that I may not be the only person having noticed this trend.

Who is Brian and why is he frustrated ?

Brian is you Gordon. I'm sorry, it was a silly mistake. I apologize.

Now, I feel I'm going to get clobbered here but I'll give it a shot. John, I understand you like the jarring nature of the black trunk. I also like the jarring nature of the trunk but I'm concerned that it is too exaggerated. What I mean by too exaggerated is that it is inauthentic. When it looks wrong, that's when it's not jarring any more. That's when it's a mistake. There is jarring good and jarring bad. When it's a photographic artifact, I'm saying it's jarring bad. Authenticity in landscape photography is, I feel, a big deal. I have no problem with inauthentic art. But in landscape photography, I'm suggesting that there must be a correspondence to reality for the image to be a good one. The trick of landscape photography is to create something artistic while also retaining the authenticity of the image. This is what is so terribly difficult about it. Yes landscape images seem often to conform to a recipe, an orthodox method if you like. But I think this is because we often feel so bound to produce something that corresponds to the reality of nature. And when reality is your judge, there are severe limitations on how artistic one can be. Best, JJ

Jeremy thanks for the clarification I somehow knew that I was Brian, I'm often the only guy in the room whom everyone else disagrees with, so it was a safe guess. I did not want to respond in his stead until I was certain that I was he.
Jeremy you have completely misunderstood or at least misrepresented my frustration. My lack of enthusiasm does not spring from the lack of polish or professionalism of recent choices, in fact I agree with you that images which will inspire lively and educational debate and discussion are the best possible criteria for selection of the potw. Although I also believe that worthwhile discussion and learning can be centered around images which are " very, very good ". My own bone of contention is with the sameness of the selections. They fall within a very narrow aesthetic regardless of the degree of polish. It is the mundane subject matter and the often painfully predictable photographic approach which frustrates me, not the quality of the images. I regularly see images at PN which, although in some instances falling down somewhat in terms of vision or technique ( unpolished ) at least offer a unique vision or some risk taking. I do not see any of those images ending up on the potw. This weeks hot button topic is how dark a tree trunk is.

I have to admit that I tend to agree with Gordon here. It gets pretty old opening up the POW each week and thinking, here we go again! I don't expect to be blown away, but I would like to feel a breeze once in awhile.

Jeremy, as to the trunk of the tree, it is probably going to be just a case of preference and not an absolute. But I don't know that I understand your description of it as a photographic artifact, as in some ways that is exactly what a photograph is, an artifact. It isn't pixelated nor is it full of noise, so the "artifact" thing has baffled me a bit from your first use of it. I also don't see it as "jarring" which might serve some sorts of images, but for me this is far from jarring. It just creates a bit of a disconnect for a moment. Letting an element go "black" isn't all that uncommon and there is a bit of detail in the top of this trunk, and with its organic qualities, it doesn't look like a pasted on shape.

Anyway, it can just come down to preference and certainly if it feels inauthentic, then it probably isn't working for you. But maybe the most telling here is your statement

This would certainly limit how one views an image it seems to me. I don't know why this is unless it is a self imposed restriction. I don't think there are ever limitations on how artistic one can be, but I do think we can limit the way we view things.

But understand Jeremy, this isn't an image I would go to the mat for and if I had come across it in any other forum, I would have clicked right through, it is nice and a little different but it is just what we have to discuss here and has some discussable things about it.

Thank you Gordon for the clarification...I see now. Do you think the Elves would take suggestions (what are the odds)? I'd love to see an example of the sort of image you have in mind.

John, I think the trunk is an artifact of the photographic process because it looks as if it is black because the camera was unable to manage the contrast of the scene properly. There are natural blacks and then there are blacks that exist because of poor exposure, a contrast range that is just outside the range of the film/sensor, poor darkroom technique, etc. I do not see this as a natural black...that is a black that the naked eye would see. In my experience, the contrast in a scene like this is actually not nearly as great as it appears in the image. So immediately, my photographer's eye yells at me....MISTAKE, TOO MUCH, OVERDONE. So, because my photographer's sense is yelling, not speaking quietly, it is a jarring artifact, not one that can be pleasingly perceived (like say a nice little bit of grain in a moody black and white).

And on the issue of self-imposed restrictions. Your choice of words is so important here. If you say "self-imposed" and "restriction", the implication is that the photographer is failing somehow. I prefer to think of the motivation for what I am doing (and probably many other landscape photographers as well) as an objective or purpose. For many of us, the objective is to document the real beauty of nature in as artistic a way as we can while retaining authenticity and the natural beauty of the scene (and this is what I think is so difficult to do well). So we are choosing what to do, not imposing it on ourselves. To be honest, from time to time I do take an artistic approach to the landscape but I am never fulfilled. So, I think, what's the point? Just do what you like and try to be more artistic about it.

Thanks again for your thoughtful commentary John. It always makes me stop and think. Best, JJ

Tree trunks that are darker on one side than the other due to rain and wind blowing in [mostly one direction] are not unusual.
I didn't think twice about the way the photo is presented because I see the ''wet/dry'' trunks pretty often.
Would I have removed the broken twigs and done something with the leaves? I would have thought about it and then would not have: Nature isn't perfect and photographs don't have to be either.
Good job Evgeni

Asher Lev,you're not the only one....!

Over 45 years in the business and every fall.... come on late, I try to get a shot which depicts that specific point in time when the true turn from fall to early winter arrives.

In my mind I visualize the last leaf or last leaves and have taken various images at various angles, times and colorizations.  It appears to me that this is exactly what the photographer was attempting to do in this image...and from the full portfolio I see many images of trees with sullen or mysterious moods. In light of my own attempts, and if I assume correctly, then this image works for me.

I see little to no PP and if so it is hidden well. Another said that they too have seen such images and live scenes in the Pacific NW. I lived in the wilderness moutains of Washington East Side for a dozen years and I too have seen this type of scene and have recorded it. My images are comparable...yet different.

For me....it is a good example of a mood and time of change. IOW...it would certainly be worthy of publishing in a smaller circulation newspaper where it might be more appreciated in a way only locals would understand.

Robert Shannon Sr.
Editor Pacific NW News
bobshannon.org
NPPA -Retired

Stephen and subsequent contibutors, analysing this photograph to death, please reconsider whether it was worth your effort? Surely it is a rubbish pic' and your endless diatribes show little appreciation of the basics of composition and meaning required to justify firing the shutter in the first place or meddling with the result.

Keith, everything has been worth the time and effort to view, read, consider, and provide comments except your post. In other words, I've wasted only 90 seconds.

"Surely it is a rubbish pic" (Keith Robinson)

Funny enough, what seems 'surely' to one observer may be totally incomparable with another observer's feelings.... And when this happens, this is usually a clear sigh of the object discussed being a TRUE FINE ART one. (Few people tend to disagree on the quality of a purely technical illustration!)

For me, personally, this photo is simply the best one ever posted by this author.

Others are not expected to agree with me though.