Grey Heron

Is this one any good?

Why or why not?

 

Thanks in advance, Matthijs.

My personal opinion is that the composition is not very good. Sorry, : (

Nothing grabs and holds the eye. I find myself trying to figure out what the dark, uninteresting shape in the lower left is at the same time I am being distracted by the white spots in the upper right. The result is that I stare at the empty space in the center. The photo might work if the heron were turned toward the right so that the bird's interesting profile leads the eye toward the other elements of the picture. As it is, there are three separate elements, the bird, the blue water, and the white sparkles with the two vertical dark lines. None stands alone as a strong element, and they do not work together to create a unified picture.

Dear Sandra,

 

That hurt a little. But... no pain no gain.

 

Maybe I shouldn't have posted it a Nature, because it's not about nature but about an image.

 

I'll try to go through your remarks one by one.

 

The composition is not very good / nothing grabs and holds the eye.

Maybe I didn't know what I wanted to show. Or maybe I wanted to show something intangible. (Probably a bit of both. Where the "not knowing what I'd like to show" might be considered a mistake.)

 

Trying to figure out what the dark, uninteresting shape is / distracted by the white spots in the upper right.

I don't think that is bad...

 

The result is that I stare at the empty space in the center.

I do think that is bad. This picture was not meant to induce staring at the emptiness. (Funnily enough my eyes can't stop roaming counter clockwise.)

 

The photo might work if the heron were turned toward the right so that the bird's interesting profile leads the eye toward the other elements of the picture.

Yup, that would have been nice!

 

As it is, there are three separate elements, the bird, the blue water, and the white sparkles with the two vertical dark lines. None stands alone as a strong element, and they do not work together to create a unified picture.

To me it is a unified picture but the question is of course whether I am the intended audience or that I try to make pictures that are pleasing to others.

 

There's fun to be had in feeling special as long as you're recognized by a few who see as you do. So I'm probably striving for picture that are "other" enough that I like them but at the same time I'd like to take pictures that are "common" enough so some other photographers like them too.

 

Hmmm... Freudian slip? I wrote photographers in stead of viewers...

 

Does that tell me something about my intended audience or my expected audience on Photo.net?

 

Thanks again for your remarks, they help me find my way in this artform.

 

Matthijs.

There are almost always two sides of art - the one that the artist sees and the one that the "others" see. Sometimes the two are one. The universal appeal factor is important in appealing to the outside audience. I agree that it is important to know who you are trying to reach. Sometimes the art that is created speaks more to the artist than to the audience... it is always interesting to see how many people share your vision - and how it is interpreted differently by others (witness Escher).