Two Too Red

I've put this up for critique mostly because I want to know what folks

think of the composition and the presentation. Is the red frame too

much or does it compliment? How is the composition? Does it work well

or not? How would you change this to improve it? Thanks for looking.

Exquisite execution, very tasteful, David!!! Best regards

I really like the photograph itself. The soft back light and the silver outline it gives the leaves is pleasing to the eye. The angle of the shot from the side and below is a good choice IMHO and the background colour is quite complimentary. I like the design created by the two leaves in tandem. I personally would have cropped a bit tighter on the left side and perhaps a tiny bit on the right as well to further enhance the structure and diagonal force set up by the leaves. The red background seems to be overwhelming the image itself and as such, I feel it detracts from an extremely effective image.

Certain point Mr. Bowbrick makes is the red backdrop. I too find it overpowers the beautiful image - which stands quite nicely on it's own. I would however brighten up those leaves a tad.

David: This is a lovely image and a fine composition. After reading your very specific request for a serious critique, I took a long look and decided to think it over for a while. When I returned just now, I found that Gordon had wonderfully stated all that I wanted to say -- and done so far better than I could. I agree with him about the red frame, and, after taking an even more careful look, I now agree with him about a slightly tighter crop -- although that's a more subtle question and not, in my opinion, a critical one. Warm regards, Joe

Thank you very much. I'm delighted that you like this pic. Regards, David

Great critique Gord, and you've not only answered my question about the border, but you've given me a new way to describe compositional elements... I was definitely aware of the diagonal nature of this composition, but I wouldn't have thought to describe it as a force, which it clearly is.

 

Jan, thank you for your generous encouragement. I had wondered about the brightness, but didn't want to over do it.

 

And Joe, thank you for your very positive comments. Clearly, you and Jan and Gord couldn't all be wrong! ;-)

 

So, I've done some more cropping, brightened the leaves and changed the border. I *do* like it better. What do you think? Thank you all for your generous time, comments, and help! Warm regards, David

Perfecto! Warm regards, Joe

And there you have it! Great work! Doug

Coming from you that's a compliment I treasure. Thank you so very much. Regards, David

Much nicer without the red border. Now the red standing on its own looks bold and beautiful. I also like Jan's suggestion for brightening up the leaves a tad ... very nice work David.

 

I think that I see lines and shapes as forces travelling across or through the planes of an image, to a large degree, as a result of all those motion studies I work on.

Much better. Very beautiful in it's simplicity, and it now keeps the eyes on the leaves where they belong instead of wandering around in the red twilight zone. Nicely done!

Thank you both for your excellent council and your steady and solid encouragement! I am learning so much from you, and other PN friends, too. I so appreciate your interest in my work, and your willingness to share your knowledge and experience with me. Best regards, David

This is a lovely fall image, simple yet strong composition and particularly nice highlighting on the branches below. Compositionally, I think the leaves' relationship to each other, as Gordon noted, works really well. I agree with removing the red border.

 

Did you consider various uses of negative space? Depending on the kind of energy you want to put out, the positioning can have much effect. I do think a bit of shading on the leaves might give a more three-dimensional quality to them.

 

I think the second submission you provided in this thread is oversaturated and has taken on an artificial look. The original leaves, as Jan mentioned, could have been brighter, but I'd consider getting them brighter without getting them redder, and it can be done. In your second version, much of the delicate texture of the leaves has been lost in favor simply of a bolder color which, to me, is more digital than fall-like.

 

Notice, too, how beautifully you've captured the small, light veins in the upper part of the upper leaf. Your depth of field doesn't allow for the veins to be as sharp in the rest of the composition, but preserving a sense of those veins, having some of that detail thoughout, would add some of that dimension I'm talking about.

David, a lot was said already, I like this version of the LEAVES as is, because I like the breathing space around them( the black area), but I like better the second version's frame, as it is more delicate and less a competition. Because the leaves don't have any shadows, they look a bit graphic, but it is still a very nice image. So it is a 3ed version....;-))

Always glad to see you show up! I'd like to know more about what you mean by thinking more (or differently) about negative space. There's negative space around these leaves, and more in the original than the re-do, but I'm kinda stumped as to what else to do with it.

 

Interesting how these things turn out on different screens. For the re-do I only bumped the luminescence and didn't change the saturation, but I see what you mean. There's also some loss of detail in making the image small enough to show up in the discussion thread. I'm going to experiment with using the plain, old brightness control, curves, and any other CS3 tricks you might want to share (-:

 

As for the DoF, I do wish I could go back and do more bracketing to get just the right setting... I'd like to have good focus out to about the beginning of the middle ray of the back leaf, or perhaps just past the end of the stem. Alas, it was a cold, and quite windy day, so I got all I could think to get before I was too cold to stay out. And of course those leaves are now long gone. But I'll be applying the same concepts to other things, and that'll help me to remember and be ready next Fall! BTW, I think there's enough shadow on to the right of the central veins that could be toasted a touch to good advantage to make the image more 3D. I'll play with it and let ya know.

 

Thank you a lot for taking the time to examine both images and to write a detailed critique. You always give me much to think about. Regards, David

Thanks for taking a look. I'm caught betwixt and between the greater or lesser space. I think the composition is more powerfully diagonal in the second, but I like the first one, too. As I said to Fred, I'm going to work on the leaves a bit more, try different methods of lightening them without making them look over saturated and too graphic... unless... hmmm... there could be some other fun to be had here by playing with filters and going much more purposefully graphic.

 

I agree about the frame and that's why I asked the initial question, cause I'd had the idea of the red frame, tried it, and wasn't sure it worked or not. Thanks for your thoughts, encouragement, and the 3ed grin! Regards, David

I was thinking about possibilities more for future shots, I guess, with negative space. Even though your leaves in the original are not quite centered, they feel close to being so. I've noticed that Rachel, in particular, often offsets her still lifes in an effective manner where the negative space is rather asymmetrical and can be rather suggestive and provide energy to her subjects, almost as if the subject is being projected into that space or emerging out of it.

 

Admittedly, "brightness" is a bit of a vague term. Often, level control and lighting filters can work well to add illumination to an image, if that's what you want. If you just want a lighter (brighter) color, upping levels can accomplish that but often needs to be offset by a reduction of saturation of a particular color. Also, selective color control can have a "brightening" effect. It's amazing how everything done in photoshop seems to have "side effects." Saturation affects texture, light affects detail, and on and on.

Side effects... now you're talking my language! ;-) I'm sure there are mathematical explanations for all the interactions between factors in PS, but I think those still don't really explain all the differences we perceive. Thanks for the elaboration about negative space. Got it. Thanks, again, for your lending your experienced eye. Regards, David

The trick is to try different ways to compose the ellements, which you will try anyway. Fred's suggestion and experience, and his know how to transfer it by commenting, is valueable and as you have written you will try it... thats the way we progress.

I looked and I think it looks best in red. YEP!

 

I think it is a great gift if you matted it this way (personally). My two cents ;)

Progress is certainly what I hope to do, and I don't know how I could fail to progress with generous gifts of time, experience and talent from you and my other PN friends?! Thank you. David

I'm glad you like it! Thanks for the encouragement! Regards, David

 

Perfectly done, beautiful work!

It's delightfully encouraging and affirming to have such positive comments from one as talented and skilled as you. I appreciate it very much! Regards, David