Stones #2

Now there's an S curve for ya!

or this:

I think you have much better pictures in your folders. Anyway a good photo but, for me, not so spectacular.

Atle,

 

I don't know that this photo represents your best work, as your portfolio is full of beautiful shots. Your captures certainly speak well of where you apparently live. I want to go there...now!

 

Congratulations!

 

Bill

Excellent composition. Reminiscent of one of my favorite Ansel Adam's works. I like the way your stones lead the eye into the photograph. I consider a good composition as one that encourages eye movement. This fits the bill for me. Congratulations. By the way, I personally like your exposure and wouldn't tinker with it in any way. I also agree with an earlier commenter (wd?) that if it is what you saw, it is what it should be.

Hugh Daly

Powerful mood created by the fingerlike spreading of high energy rays. One can sense the somewhat surreal atmosphere, resonate with the photographer in the contrast he felt both optically, and on the skin between warm and cool. I enjoy contemplating the emptiness awaiting the solar touch that enables and fills all else. Fg detail is superb; my complaints are restricted to what appears to be an excess of sharpening, especially apparent in the lower 2/3rds, and the halo above the hill on the right - related, no doubt, to the sharpening issue.

 

Congratulations and regards.

I don't just don't feel the depth of emotion projected by some of our viewers comments. To me, this simply looks like an opportunity to catch a good sunset while driving by. Unlike some other images this photographer has uploaded which are presented in multiple compositions of the same subject, I don't see any other shots of this subject, which would indicate to me that this was the first shot taken, as later shots would have even darker and less effective. The darkened foreground would indicate to me that the photographer couldn't get set up in time to catch the light on the rocks. Such magic highlights (if they were ever there) on the foreground would have made the image more interesting. It's a very nice photo, which also looks good (maybe even better) cropped.

For me, Doug Burgess's square framing improves the composition. There is a harmonious balance between rocks at near right and the sunbeams (I wouldn't have dodged the sky though). The square also de-emphasises the photograph's two main shortcomings: the vacant lower left corner and the insipid sky at upper right.

 

Much improved.

Ah, now Doug is a master. I've often seen area cropped out of a frame, but who else among us can crop areas INTO the frame that weren't there to begin with!? (Well, almost a master... The givaway is at the bottom of the nearest rock...)

It's a post-card image which should be popular with Tourists to purchase, who have been to this area.

Doug's image looks marginally better merely (I think) because it is subtley brighter. The original looks a bit too dark on my screen. As far as the compositions go, there's something to be said for both - the original simply has a more classical, landscape feel.

This is a good image, no doubt, and well balanced. Unfortuneately, it is also a familiar image to us all, as its likeness has been seen countless times before. The safety of it, and the inspiration that some people get from it(?) are what make this kind of photo the only piece of color that some of the most drab offices across the country will allow employees to have. This is a beautiful and balanced shot, but kind of boring.

I liked the POW's composition with a mild "but"... Now that I see Doug's squared upload, I think it is indeed an improvement.

I'd say "a decisive improvement". Well done, Doug.

Thanks Marc, and others. I must say, I enjoy trying, although I have far to go.

I really think that Doug's cropped, lightened shot is a definite improvement because it focuses the best aspects of a very nice photograph. Well done.

I personally think this is a fantastic photo. I can't go on technical merit, because I don't know much about that stuff, but all I can say is that this image moves me. Some here say it is boring or drab, but that is all subjective to each of us. I find this photo beautiful and inspiring. The foreground rocks give great depth to the photo and they lead us into the dramatic beams of light, all with a backdrop of beautiful mountains and a sky filled with passion. But you see, I love mountains and the wilderness and nature. I can't imagine looking at this beautiful scene with a ho-hum, we've seen this a million times, view. Take a look at the previous POW, and a couple before that one too, which were wonderful, but they were street scenes with people. How many times have we seen street scenes with people? I see people on the street more often than I do dramatic landscapes, but it's all good, and those were wonderful and very interesting photos. It's all subjective and personal preferences and tastes. What "moves" someone, "bores" someone else. Which makes photography interesting. I sincerely admire the talent and skill of those who are masters of Photoshop and upload their creations or digital alterations, but they don't move me much, other than to say, "wow, cool." But they obviously move a large number of people more deeply than me, as they are consistently the top-rated images on this site, which is great. The talent here is amazing. But I find so much here is subjective, and many times people seem to forget that. I don't rate photos that don't interest me because I can't objectively appreciate them as much as others who dig that stuff. What am I trying to say? Heck, I don't know, I forgot. Where am I anyway? Where'd everyone go? Shoot, no one ever listens when I talk. I'll just leave a note on the fridge here that says, "Great Shot, Atle, and Congratulations!"

Although I think it loses quite a bit to my monitor I enjoy this picture very much. Congratulations on a well deserved POW. I must admit I prefer the squared version that was submitted above. IMO, square format works particularly well for landscapes, in large part because they're usually medium format. In this case I think the cropping has removed material that wasn't really doing much of anything and thereby brings us more quickly to the essence of the photo, that of the beautiful rocks leading to the breathtaking sun rays. Maybe an "Auxiliary POW" award is in order.

Congratulations on the POW Atle! I was hoping to see a scenic photo as POW sometime and this one is nice. I prefer your original format over the square cropped one because I see more texture in the sky. The subtle colors are nice, although I do feel the foreground is a little flat. Of course monitor calibration is always an issue with subtle colors. Photo.net should have a monitor calibration how-to. Maybe I'll post some stuff in my area sometime on calibration.

wonderful

I feel the arguments against the image have most concisely been put by Douglas Vincent, who points out that the image is almost beyond the latitude of the film to record, and Kelly Loverud who dismisses the image as "a beautiful and balanced shot, but kind of boring". I can appreciate both points of view, but can't agree, particularly with Douglas, who suggests that the picture should perhaps never have been made.

 

On the other hand, I'm not so sure the comments in favour of the image have so far fully expressed the value of it, so I'll try to express what the image does for me.

 

The image reminds me on immediate impact that the world is not yet trashed! There are still pristine places on this globe, where we can find serenity and peace. Yes!!! Perhaps others don't need this reminder as much as I do, but every time I view a quality wilderness photograph, this is the message that I seek, and I

am uplifted when I find it.

 

The sunrays through the clouds simply symbolise light at the end of the tunnel, hope after depression. Trite perhaps, but for some of us in need of a visual affirmation of the goodness of life, this image, regardless of any technical shortcomings or scan deficiencies, provides it. I love the wide open spaces represented. I feel I can run, jump, breathe in this scene, fill my lungs with clean air, and therefore I prefer Atle's original to Doug's carefully considered, but constrictive crop.

 

In conclusion, I am reminded of the great Leunig sketch of the old gentleman ensconced in an armchair in a nursing home musing, "I may never go to the Wilderness Shop, but it gives me great peace of mind just to know it's there."

This picture looks like it could be the opening for "Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey". I like the eye leading qualities but, kinda boring. Perhaps go back to the scene and have John Mclain running, jumping, and filling his lungs with air in the distant background.

I was just going to write that John's comments had brought back some respectability to the POW this late in the week when we're all looking for someone to fill his mouth with his foot so we can jump on him.

A poem in praise of the Square Format

As every photographer learns eventually

The square is perfect compositionally,

Where every photograph wants to be,

And perfect circles fit perfectly.

 

John's comment is one of the smarter ones here. Cropping seems to be the one most subjective aspect of photography. Most of us can tell when an image is sharp, and we can tell contrast pretty uniformly, and we can eyeball basic compostion, but when it comes to cropping: Someone has to have it a little thinner, a little fatter, a little wider, etc. Funny, isn't it? Did the critics do this to painters of old? Or is this a peculiarity to photography? I see John McLaine has a good point, both about needing or wanting to remember places like this, and about having room in the frame to feel free. For me, the image is about the rocks and the sun. The fields are secondary and so the square format I offered was a way of maximizing the primary elements and still including the secondary elements. If compromise were called for, it would be the perfect solution, but I feel it's a terrific fit anyway.

I would prefer not to view cropping and composition as separate entities. Though I'm not against doing it, using cropping to find interesting alternatives out of a slide/negative, I feel, involves a bit of cheating. I don't feel the same way while using it to fix 'minor' glitches/oversights in composition. Barring lens limitations, shouldn't the photographer ideally visualize what he wants to capture and compose accordingly. Nailing it everytime would need better eyes and compositional skills on the part of the photographer, while deriving interesting croppings would involve hindsight and serendipity.