Sculptures of nature 5b

Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Enjoy.

Perfect timing! Liked it very much!!

The shot is okay but for those of us who live in the Southwest, it is a bit of a photographic cliche'.

Hi Steve,

Perhaps the scene is well-known, but I'd not be so hasty in judgment. I'd love to see your takes at this location.

A nice interpretation of an old classic.

An exceptional classic!! Love the pinks and yellows...

Steve I am with Mehmet on this, where are your images of comparison. Proof then speak.

 

Personally Mehmet images are wonderful. A great blend of photography and art. I been a fan for a couple years and Mehmet your only getting better. If you ever get in the Phoenix area let me know I'd enjoy going on a shoot with you. -Scott

 

I'd enjoy knowing where this is and why it is a classic. thx

I don't think that Steve R. should be bullied for expressing a contrary opinion. And his opinion was reasonable and polite.

Scott,

Couple of weeks ago, I've seen this scene on the cover of a book, so it must be very well known. Although, at the time I took this pic, I didn't even know that it was one of the snapshot locations in Zion. There were dozen or so photographers closeby shooting a different view, clearly they were trying to avoid shooting cliche shots. Any case, since this was posted, I must say, I received comments covering the whole spectrum. Nothing surprises me anymore. You'll see this spot right at the entrance to Zion NP.

I must also add that Zion surprised me more than Yosemite.

 

Finally, a collection of my photographs will appear in Sep-Oct issue of Lenswork. B&W version of this shot may be included in the collection.

 

cheers,

 

 

 

"where are your images of comparison. Proof then speak."

 

No proof is required or even relevent as to critiquing. One can make valid observations about a photograph even if they are not able to create an image as good or in the same way. Certainly some film critics cannot make a sucessful movie but are well able to discuss the merits of one nevertheless.

 

Moreover the critique challenged here was that the image scene was cliche. No photograpghy skills are required to make that determination so again, the proof demanded is not relevent. One need never take a picture of kittens in a basket, a female flipping long wet hair in the water or a sunset on a rocky coastline to formulate an rational opinion on whether such an image is cliche or not. If there is a disagreement as to whether it IS cliche that is fair but it has nothing to do with the quality of someone's own images.

 

I find the image to be good and well composed with maybe a wee bit too much lightening of the shadow areas. So many photo's are cliche and over done so this one seems reasonably original.

Having visited Zion last week, I was impressed by how you composed the shot and used the splashes of color. I also like how you captured a sense of movement in the river. My take was from a different perspective and a bit more somber (http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=7680349).

 

 

John,

I'd say your following statement is unfair and perhaps not what you indented to say:

"No proof is required or even relevent as to critiquing."

 

Would you say, critiquer can say anything he/she want without any reference to reality?

If so, what value would that carry?

 

I repeat my original response to Steve, -- I'd not be so hasty in judgement.

 

I hinted at this, but it may have been too subtle. Let me spell it more clearly:

If you know the scene, or seen images from the scene, I'd ask you, as well, carefully inspect them and see if this image actually the same..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is the value of a critic, if you can not add objectivity to what you say. This page is for critiques which are vastly different from opinions. What I heard was an opinion.

 

Secondly Steve does not give us the ability to even judge his abilities to critique as he provides no portfolio for the PhotoNet community to view.

 

I made no comment as to politeness. Steve's comments were quite respectful, but, simply were an opinion not a critique.

 

A critique is "The word critic comes from the Greek κριτικός, kritikós - one who discerns, which itself arises from the Ancient Greek word κριτής, krités, meaning a person who offers reasoned judgment or analysis, value judgment, interpretation, or observation. ..."

 

So I will apologize to those of you who need something for airing my opinnion on Mehmets page.

 

As a critique, I find the use of light, color and depth done quite well. I would like to learn the techniques applied. The image has great depth and gives the viewer a path to take a journey down the stream (across the image), the image composition walks the viewer from the foreground to the back ground via the streams meandering path, while the tree and mountains do a wonderful job of framing the image.

 

I'm intrigued as to the use of shadowed foreground and reflective light in the background.

 

What is done nicely is the sharp crisp foreground and soft subtle haze in the background.

 

The only element of the image I am not excited about is the sky. it is too bad there was not a good thunderhead building, with some blue sky in the distance, but, you take what you are given many times on road trips.

 

Regards,

Scott