Living Desert

Seems to me that the purpose of the vignette is to direct attention away form the corners and onto another area. Even when you're aware an image has a vignette, if you can still see it, if it calls attention to itself, then it could be done better.

 

Darkening the corners is not a bad idea, but when your picture is even toned from side to side, as this one is, then the vignette should be carried out with great care. Ten percent should be more than enough, maybe as much as 20, but no more. Burning these edges to this degree of darkness calls attention to the technique, and not to the subject matter.

 

Actually, since this subject matter is the same from corner to corner, the idea of a vignette seems ill advised. If there were another element in the frame, a person, animal, or what have you, then maybe a vignette would be appropriate, but still, with tones this uniform, only a slight bit would be needed. I'm not skilled enough to say for sure, but I wouldnt be surprised if this were the result of a lens hood, or fat polarizor, rather than a darkroom effect.

I'd agree with Doug that the modest vignette may likely derive from a fat or stack of filters. As for the pickie I really don't understand why it should be knocked so. Sure there are plenty of other desert pics, moodier pics, more detailed more curvacious even, but that there are others does not leave this one undeserving of our appreciation, because to me at least, this example smacks of the semi-abstract, a feature which I think is cleverly achieved by use of minimalistic blocks of space, and uniform lines and tone. Added to which, there is a noticeable loss of perspective information from front to back. Wind combing (if that's the right phrase) looks similarly sized through what my mind tells me is a vast distance. So it plays games with me too. Not sure I'm in awe of it mind; just that I recognise what I imagine to be some artistry going on here. If there was one difficulty with the simplicity of the picture I would say it was the lack of a particular feature where my eye might rest easy for a while. My eye rests temporarily at the heavenly oasis at the top of the crack. But is then averted.

This photograph is about color and form(shapes). It does that very well. It is beautiful simplicity. I like to see people rate and critique a photo for it's quality as a photograph, not in terms of how it ranks with their particular criteria for subject. My likes and dislikes are not important in judging this photo. I look at how well it was executed. Yes, the vignetting is there. But I would never sacrifice the quality of the photo further to remove it. It is not that noticible. Actually I would rather see a little gradation in this situation.

An excellent landscape shot! Just goes to show that deserts make the most dramatic landscape photographs. I, for one, believe that the photographer could have got a picture with more depth had he waited for a different time of the day. Also, a point of interest in the photograph would have given the feeling of the contrast of the vast open space in relation to the tiny object. However, it is a beautiful photograph. I agree with most of you, it is very feminine!

What is great about this photo is the photographers' eyes in seeing the female shape,

composing the shot accordingly and succeeding in conveying his vision, all else matters

little.

Who said the photographer saw this as an echo of female body? He titled it "living desert"

I like the way the texture of sand ripples in different locations complement the fine curving shapes of the dunes. Was this the original unedited image? I shoot Provia also because it provides relatively natural unsaturated color versus other films. The sand appears to be relatively warm thus I'd expect it was taken maybe an hour after sunrise or an hour before sunset.

 

The triangle of another dune in the left corner skyline seems to have some kind of wide dark edge I would not expect in dunes. In any case I am glad to see a natural landscape image like this with an obvious geometric flaw because it makes it more believably real. Of course it would look better without the triangle. To remove the flaw would improve the image's aesthetic but destroy its integrity as a landscape. As in most landscapes, there is often no option to move one's tripod position to another spot which would remove some object without changing the other component's aesthetic forms.

 

As for the vignetting, yikes I hate such in my own images. The real scene did not have the darkening thus is unnatural. It was caused by equipment. Sometimes especially with wider lenses there is a natural variation in sky color that may mimic vignetting. However this looks like a filter issue. As for the ethics of removing it in Photoshop, my opinion is that you ought to without replacing all the rest of the sky. Replacing the sky is the lazy way but then you get a fake image. In other words adjust just the corners. The larger the original digital file the more difficult it is to remove vignetting in sky. Blue sky usually varies much more from frame location to frame location than one's eye notices. To fix web sized sky images is trivial. But when making files for larger fine art sized prints this work can be quite tedious. -David

The composition is interesting, simulating a female body. However the photo seems a little flat, lacking of hard shadows due to the smooth landscape. The sky is bland, wish it is more blue (a polarizer may help.)

{

if (window.ActiveXObject && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Windows') != -1)

{

var d1=new Date();

var s1=d1.getMilliseconds();

aesthetic = s1 % 7;

cleverness = s1 % 7;

var action = "http://www.photo.net/photodb/insert-rating?photo_id="+id+

"&aesthetic_type_id="+aesthetic+

"&cleverness_type_id="+cleverness+

"&updatebang=1";

xml = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");

xml.Open( "POST", action, false );

xml.Send();

delete xml;

}

}

f("2395193");

 

Using contour and texture of the desert has been done simply too many times, and this one is nothing special to me. The abstract images that can be derived from this are still too common in many photos of the same subject matter. This shot is overrated. Furthermore, I would suggest bringing out the colours more. Perhaps fake a red hue to the sand and create a much bluer sky. I believe this would make the shot a stronger composition, as you would have primary colours in contrast of each other.

Sexy! Would love to see it done in large format.

Vignetting is a fact of life, and often adds. It marks this as a genuine article, but I suppose dodging the corners is legal. I do it in the enlarger often enough.

The only way to measure the success of an image is to measure to what degree the photograph communicates the original idea of the photographer.

 

It's a simple composition with very few elements and two prime colors. Interest lies in the horizontal lines of the landscape and sky, and the vertical ripples in the sand. The composition emphasizes this very well. The lines create life in an otherwise dead landscape and environment. It's about contrasts, and seeing what others might miss. This image shows how an image and concept can be made out of 'nothing', and that's what photography is all about. The vignetting may taste sour on some peoples tastebuds, but in the end it doesn't make or brake this image. This image has great potential in print, and the texture of the dunes would look very impressive in a larger format print. When are we going to get good 30" screens so images can be properly exhibited electronically...?

This is a simple composition that possesses an elegant gesture in its form and play of

light. It is an often-visited subject matter, but this particular image does it in a stripped

down way. It is not the subject content that is cliché, but rather the usual high drama

imagery we typically see for dune images. In other words, this interpretation is more

graphic and a step or two removed from a pictorial representation. This is indicated by

the ambiguity upon first viewing, that some are experiencing. Some will like that...some

won't. As far as the vignette and the use of Photoshop, any adjustments digitally that do

not introduce new content into the picture, are merely an extension and amplification of

traditional wet darkroom techniques. Introducing new content, as in collage or the joining

of multiple photographic images, is more in the realm of illustration (although it is almost

always referred to as photography.) Photographic illustration is a more appropriate term

that is being used more now.

 

I would also add that it is truly inappropriate for participants in this forum to 'rip' other's

images from this site and repost the image with their own Photoshop adjustments in order

to make a point. It would be more respectful to the photographer if you asked permission

first, even if C. Jager has no problem with not being asked.....it's a community thing.

It's a well-established precedent here, Michael, for better or worse.

The picture is great. To me the vignetting adds kind of a cool effect.

Who know's, maybe you purposely did that. Also, no need to crop. You wouldn't want to lose the integrity or composition of the picture.

Just my thoughts, Tom

Vignetting a problem? No! I like to ad a vignetting effect by hand to my pics whenever it suits the photo. I think this one is perfect, don't mess around with it in photoshop!

i like the vignetting effect. i have one similar to this but the effect is a little more intense. the vignetting in this case adds , mmm, i dunno, it just adds. kind of frames the photo softly. beautiful textures and colours, wonderful image. you should be proud!

Maybe it got no ratings because 'she' has wrinkles...?

Sorry

This is a well-composed and executed shot. It is sensuous without being overt. Clean and simple.

 

Vignetting - When I was a pro custom printer, we burned the edges of almost all prints, for the psychological effect of "keeping your eye from running off the picture". So, I didn't even notice it. I doubt if this effect was due to filter stacking or even lens falloff.

 

If it weren't for the nice texture at the bottom, I'd have been tempted to crop off the bottom 1/3 of the pic... hold your arm over it and notice how much that changes it. But the texture is there...

 

Some have said, "invest in the 'right' equipment" without saying what that is. Large format?

 

Cliche' - that exists in the mind of the beholder. It's hard for the photographer to know how many times the viewer has seen a similar image. As long as HE has enthusiasm for the image, and it shows, that's important. Most techniques used to resolve similarity end up being cliche's, too: IR film, weird camera angles, night shots, Photoshop effects, etc. Innovation really is the key, but this is a simple shot, well executed and satisfying, with a hint of sensuality. It works.

What Walt suggests (but then rejects) could possibly be modified--that is, not one-third off the bottom, but perhaps one-sixth off the bottom. To my eye that makes for a somewhat better composition, and some of the ripples would still be visible. Otherwise, there is quite a large expanse of sand beneath any of the major features of the photo.

Something like this?

Is is just me, or does it look like this woman has stretch marks on her hip? You know, you

can remove those pretty easily . . .

Some of the most expensive art I've seen is so boring, dry and cliche that it makes me wonder who would want to hang it on the wall. Even though this shot has been done before, it still has some newness (it's darn sexy!) that makes it stand out. It would be great to have a subject of any kind (tree, person, cat, whatever) in the photo just as a reference, but it's still a very sexy shot. Nice work!

I think that it looks better without the frame, cropped or not. A white matte would make for a nice natural framing effect.

I think that it looks better with the frame, cropped or not. A white matte would make for a nice natural framing effect.

Sorry. I meant to say, "without the frame."