Riggindale #2

The lower body of water has a very nice bend to it, and the upper body of water is very subtle and is a neat contrast. I would like to have seen little more of a buffer between the curvy river and bottom edge of the shot. Overall, super-nice! Neat colors, lighting. Very nice.

That's a great shot. Are you standing in the same location as when you shot this one? The blue water forms a very good contrast to the brown. Also a horizonless composition that is very characteristic of your style. The only (very minor) thing I'd wish to be different is the shadows of the ridge you're standing on darkening the bottom of the frame.

The view in context can be seen

>here

. Any thoughts? All opinions and ratings welcome.

Thanks for the link to the other image as well Phil. This is a wonderful image. It has an interesting abstract quality to it that's made really dynamic by that lovely loop in the river and the jagged darker band of rock just above it. I feel a great sense of distance in the image, almost like you were in an airplane taking the shot. Strange, because I feel like I'm farther away from the scene here than in your other Riggindale image.

 

The other Riggindale image is, to me, a real gem as well. However, in comparing it with this one, I'd have to say that the shadows here become less desirable than in #1. I guess because of the greater context you get in #1, the shadows seem perfectly in place whereas here it becomes a slight (very slight) impediment to me. Nonetheless, its an outstanding piece of work.

I would have preferred it too without the shadow at the bottom.

 

It is a very pleasant picture to look at. However, I don't know if it would stand the test of time, i.e. would one like it if it were hanging on the wall and seen every day. I prefer the larger view with the L framing of the foreground rocks.

 

PS. Can't flip it because of the water.

I'm glad to see this. I'm in love with the other view, and this is helpful to get a real sense of what we were looking at. Along with this additional information idea, I'd like to know how wide that river is...

Nice detail but the shadowy part at the bottom hurts. This could be nicer, at least in my opinion if taken with a single lightmood. Good framing, though! Greetings,

I tend to prefer the other image you linked to, it gave me a sense of scale and scope. This photo looked very flattened and I could seem to tell that it was taken with a telephoto, but I was missing some visual clues to how far away you really were.

This works. The shadow gives a base and adds contrast. The tele and the angle of view without the horizon emphasize form over scale. The color palette is appealing. The variety in textures adds interest. I wouldn't change a thing.

Thanks for the comments everyone. There seems to be a general unease with the shadow at the bottom. The shadow is from Rough Crag where I'm stood. I thought the shadow more noticeable on #1 where it forms a broad line at the base of that picture but found it quite agreeable since it traced the line of the beck. It didn't seem to criss-cross it. In #2 I thought it less noticeable and easily explained away by reference to similar colouring in unshaded areas found nearby. At a small scale its presence does become clear. Oh well. England's only Golden Eagle colonies are found in Riggindale (there's an obsevatory nearby). Trust you guys to be as sharp-eyed.

 

The intention here is to flatten the image. Lighting helped a good deal. I wanted viewers to realise this was an aerial view of the river but to forget about height and measurements and simply analyse the line, bands of earth colouring and texture variety

 

Regarding Doug's request for more information, I haven't wandered the valley floor but would guess that at it's widest in this picture the river (properly the beck) is about 7m. For assistance I'm attaching a map. The map is precisely one square kilometre and is positioned with north at the top. The ox bow pictured is circled. I'm standing virtually due south of it where you see a red dot. It's midday or thereabouts.

amazing detail, for me it is the loop which makes the picture, and i do not mind the shadow at all, as it adds to the photo.

Looks great Phil, the shadow doesn't bother me either (in fact the shadow in your other shot referred to above bothers me a lot more but then unlike you I'm not partial to L-shaped compositions). I do wonder though if including a little more at the bottom of the frame (if it was an option) would more clearly make the shadowed region a third 'band'.

I am a big fan of your work! Great work!

I find it hard to get a good sense of depth, which makes this photo interesting to me.

Hi Phil!

 

The wonderful thing about this image is without the river I could easily believe that those rocks were just a few feet in front of the camera. The illusion is wonderful! We have beautiful shapes, textures, and colors, but no sense of depth. The river adds context while providing an abstract quality.

 

I greatly prefer this one over the attachment. I would have liked the river a bit higher in the frame however. But not much. At 72 PPI for the large view were probably talking about 10 pixels higher. But that would be my only complaint.

 

Very nice.

I prefer the other one, as it was flat eventhough it had foreground. This one hasnt got foreground but feels less flat than the other photo. Also the subtle tones in the other photo were very nice.

 

This photo I like as well, but now that I saw the other one as well... I think I prefer that one. If you'd have a third or maybe even fourth photo of this concept than it would look nice in a series I think.

 

Regards,

 

Julien

Ineresting. What is it?

The shadow doesn't bother me. It adds another element that I don't think detracts at all. I don't think it's one for overanalysing, just enjoying as it is.

 

I'm glad you posted the map, it's nice to see the location of the picture within the topography.