Ice in Collingwood Harbour

Just strolling near the harbour & the imperfections on the smooth ice surface caught my eye.  The kind of shot anyone who's looking can get with their P&S.  The histogram of the first shot was biased too far to the left so I added +1 compensation & let fly!  Minor Photoshop tweaking completed the exercise.  Best, LM.

I think you are being a bit modest there Len. A lot of people could "look" but fewer people would "see" the landscape within the landscape as you have here and composed it this well. This minimilistic abstract is a classic example of where "less is more". Very well observed and captured..

Best Regards

Alf

Thanks for your ego lifting comment.  To be fair, I did say "...anyone who's LOOKING can capture with their P&S..."  On the other hand I find myself consciously 'looking' more now than in the past.  I usually take many frames, with only one or two making the final edit.   This just happens to be, for me, the most satisfying of the batch I took during the hour I strolled the waterfront.  Don't be a stranger.  Best, LM.

Len,

This really works for me. Of course, I would crop from the right to remove the first lump of ice but it works well just as it is.

Hello Len,

No one can duplicate your art.Beautiful and have a lot of negative spaces.

By the way, I reposted my horizon from the Philippines for you on a larger file.

Thanks for your comments and support all these years and thanks too

for sharing your wonderful compositions.. sally

Thanks for your kind remarks.  I try to make the framing fit the composition and not the other way around.  I'm not afraid to crop the original, which was the case here.  (too much extraneous material in the top of the original frame)  Your revised version of the water & sky scene is a benefit to old eyes.  Somewhere around 640 high x 960 pixels wide is usually a good starting point.  I hope to have some constructive input on the photos for people in my "Interesting People" list for a long time to come.  Stay tuned!  Best, LM.

You almost got by me there!  Yes, I guess a slight crop would still leave a decent frame and, in the process, eliminate an arguably excess area, bottom right.  Not a deal breaker for these old eyes though so I guess I'll just leave it to simmer while I ponder the wisdom of your suggestion.  Your input is much appreciated.  Best, LM.

Len, 

I just can't help myself. I shoot with a 645 camera and normally end up with a square. I find time and again, that I get a stronger image after the fact. It has become the way that I work.

Square?  I often use square framing, probably due to the fact that I own & use a few 6x6 cameras and, more importantly, if the subject demands it.  Let's throw a square composition from my original frame out there & see what comments it elicits.  Thanks for your persistence.  Perhaps there's a lesson in here for many.  Best, LM.

Infinitely better, IMHO, it's  tighter and tells the story more succinctly, and with more impact.

I prefer the original rectangular crop...it is so sensual! compliments -koushik

A version for both of your tastes.  But I have to tell you that I'm coming around to appreciating Jeff's version more every day.  I may even print both for my portfolio album.  Thanks for your validation Koushik, and Jeff for your thought provoking and sage advice.  Best, LM.

Your comments and constructive critiques will be gratefully received.

Best, LM.

I guess this is one of the reasons photography is so intriguing - I'm partial to the original image because of the strong, defined line running off the edge.  I like the square format with the crop - just not as much.  And here you thought it was just a point and shoot moment - seeing things in different ways sure makes life more interesting, huh?

I Just revisited this one and noticed the square crop version. I'm not usually a lover of square formats, but I have to concede that in this case it looks a lot stronger with more balance and depth than the original.

Regards

Alf

just one more observation - the square image has another ice cake at the top of the image (missing from the original) also, it looks as though there is more contrast in the square image

Good to have your thoughts on this one.  Kind of evens out the score. (if I were keeping score).  :-)  Good observation on the contrast.  Working both versions from the same original, I probably didn't use the exact same work flow values to arrive at a final image.  I sometimes (OK, often) hurry these things too much in an effort to get a point to the screen.  The second version could very well have a tad more contrast.  I agree with whoever said " It's not about the camera"  or something similar.  I use both Canon A540 P&S & Bronica SQ Ai,with my Minolta XG-M providing the bulk of my offerings.  Some of my most satisfying results are from the P&S.  Best, LM.

Consider the source. (Jeff Grant, a Hassey user)  When one is used to seeing square it's not much of a stretch to see why he suggested that crop.  Thing is, he's got a strong point.  As I said before, something for everyone.  Thanks for your continued interest.   Best, LM.

Len, this is what makes PN such a good place. This image has provoked an interesting and revealing discussion that everyone learns from without egos getting in the way.

Works for me.  At least enough to remind myself that my membership fees are almost due.  Should be good to go for another year then.  Best, LM

Len, I like both versions -- It's really hard to chose between the two.  They each have their own attractions.... However, I like the original version maybe a tad better, as I prefer the photo with the lesser contrast depicted -- feels fittingly softer, and slightly more 'poetic' to me somehow :-)  Best regards to you, Marjolein

The original composition accentuates the dark horizontal crack in the ice while Jeff's square version emphasizes the tufts of ice crystals.  I too like both as each has it's own attraction.  This one has elicited far more discussion than I imagined it would at the time of exposure.  As Jeff says, "...discussion is good..."  Best, LM.