mac_alain 0 Posted October 10, 2002 I mean grrrrrreat. This picture actually moves me. Magnificent. In EVERY way, right down to the positioning of the credit line, which actually improves the composition. I have no choice but to give it 7 / 7. Link to comment
ashley_hosten 0 Posted October 10, 2002 Yes, this is a 7 / 7. It shouldn't be , because we've all seen landscapes before, and chuches too. But this is perfect. So double-seven is fair (IMO). Its so good, I almost feel the church saw you coming - and it got up to go pose between the trees for you. Thats how magical this photo is to me. Link to comment
maarten_van_hoven 0 Posted October 11, 2002 It's great! But I wonder how it would have been if the mountains behind were a little more obvious... Or maybe they shouldn't be visible?... Link to comment
trevor_hopkins 0 Posted October 11, 2002 A very attractive, high-key image. The misty mountains in the background are wonderful. I'd be reluctant to call it 'perfect' since the lighting is rather flat and the featureless sky creates a base-heavy feel to the picture. Perfection is a harsh mistress, and she'd probably have demanded dawn sunlight catching the edge of the church and trees, or a beam of light from a storm-laden sky striking the church like a spotlight, or a line of footprints leading up to the church, or Omar Sharif riding past in a horse-drawn sleigh right out of Dr Zhivago... It's a very good landscape, but it's not perfect. Link to comment
luciano_checco 0 Posted October 11, 2002 Looking at your portfolio it looks like that this photo is so different from your average style, members give your opinion please Link to comment
jsthorne 0 Posted October 12, 2002 ... such perfect simplicity. I didn't think a picture like this could be so good. Link to comment
fabriziogiudici 0 Posted October 12, 2002 Nice sharp details and pale colours. The pale mountains are a perfect background, neither too white, nor too distracting. There's a bit of washed out detail in the top of the tower but it isn't so important. Link to comment
ashley_hosten 0 Posted October 13, 2002 Patrick, a commentor above remarked that this image is different to the rest in your portfolio. I've had a look - and realise that the point is valid. Can you give some details about how (or where) you managed to capture this image? Link to comment
trevor_hopkins 0 Posted October 13, 2002 I think some people could interpret the previous [unedited] comment as a veiled accusation of plagiarism... Link to comment
patrickconnolly 0 Posted October 13, 2002 First of all, I'd like to thank everyone for taking the time to view and comment on my pictures; this one in particular. I have added a folder called 'Justification' which has a second, wider angle shot I took of the church. In the comments to that shot I provide a bit more info on the technical details. There isn't much more to add from a technical standpoint unfortunately. It was after all, 16 years ago and I did not write down shutter speeds or aperature. There has been a period of nearly 10 years in which I did not actively pursue photography as either a hobby or avocation. These days most of my pictures are of my kids' soccer and cheerleading competitions. My discovery of photo.net and the contributions and participation of its members have revitalized my interest. Thanks to all ! Link to comment
ashley_hosten 0 Posted October 14, 2002 Patrick, for taking the time (and effort) to provide 'justification' of the origins of your image. I was probably the most ardent of your admirers for this image. And I still am. I have seen many, many, landscapes; and this is one of the most pure and poetic. I believe even the esteemed Charlie Waite (landscape specialist) would've been proud of this image. Well done. And thanks for humoring the sceptic(s). By the way; Your supporting image is also very good. Why not wait for a couple of weeks, then submit that also for critique? I predict success in the Higher Rated(s) also. Link to comment
peter haraszti photography 0 Posted October 14, 2002 What a stunning, peaceful picture. Congratulations! Link to comment
scott bulger 0 Posted October 14, 2002 Graphically strong and well composed. Top notch. Link to comment
patrickconnolly 0 Posted October 14, 2002 Ashley, thanks for your comments. It was no problem at all to provide 'justification' to the 'skeptics'. I think it was without a doubt a valid question that was raised. The ability to voice that question and have a civil and constructive dialog about the issue lies at the very heart of the 'critique' forum of PN. Thanks again to all who are participating, and thanks again Ashley for standing up to ask the tough questions. Pat Link to comment
nancy_patrick 0 Posted October 14, 2002 Excellent composition and sublimb tonal qualities. Well done!! Link to comment
hayward 0 Posted October 15, 2002 Bravo. This is a very good picture for all the reasons stated above. I just wanted to comment that I had remembered seeing your portfolio and when I saw this one with your name on the "top photos" board, it instantly occurred to me that it was different (and much better) than what I had seen from you before. It never crossed my mind that this wasn't your photo. Obviously, I can't speak for everyone, but I'm not sure the comments were a reference to integrity - at least I would not have interpreted them that way. For me, this phenomenon is the magic of photography. If you are like me, you take a lot of photos destined for the trash bin and very occasionally everything comes together in a special sort of way like your photo. Again, congratulations. Link to comment
sharlene_gaenicke 0 Posted October 15, 2002 incredibly beautiful! i like your choice of placing the subject in the frame and stepping to the side so that all trees are within view and not one behind the other. Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now