Heavy horses --------------- v-IMG_6209_b_4w

bonita foto,abraços.

What a choice POV to seize the coordinated teamwork between the farmer and his horse.Excellent image!

Meilleures salutations-Laurent

Very Good (6). Great POV. While I would not want a fancy sky to distract me from the horse and Farmer but this one  is a bit 'non-descript' and that might have lead me to do a crop to focus on the elements I like.  I just scrolled the image on my screen (which eliminates much of the top of the image) and I think I see a potential square crop or a portrait crop.

Just my two cents.

The angle from wich You took the picture is excellent, showing all the action.  I agree with Tony about  cropping on the top.  Particularly for me, I prefer to see the picture without the blurring edges, but it is of course matter of personal taste. This image could be also interesting in black and white. Good work!

Regards,

Rosario.

Dear ALL,
Thanks a lot for your time, encouragement and your precious advices that are always taken under consideration.

Michalis

Excellent composition and processing.  I could live with either crop, but the later is a little stronger.

Dear Michail,

This is fantastic! Full of energy, power and drama....wonderful!!

I think I may prefer the original version. Contrary to what might feel intuitive, in this case I think a little extra distance from the man actually adds to the energy coming off of him. There is more turbulence.

Tim

Very impressive image. I like the dynamics between the farmer, horse and the ground. These three elements belong together. The sky creates the space. Compliments.  

I think the first crop is better in demonstrating the atmosphere while the second crop is great in how it enhances the dramatic impact of the image particularly by emphasizing the three vertical axes within the picture (the farmer and the legs of the animal). Amazing shot.

Great dramatic phot I am only wondering how would it look in B&W.

Great shot

Thank you all very much.

Here is a b&w version.

Good to see a photo from the real life of working people.
The composition is heavily centered on the man behind the plow with the horse harness and tail still in focus, but the rest of the scene more or less blurred and condemned to its function of framing. The main impression one gets is the impression of movement and toil. I like it.

Basically, I find this image rather compelling. The man, who is the obvious central focus of the image. His canted angle, with that slight dip in his shoulder while his arms are outstretched, controlling various "parts" of the process while his intense eyes coordinate the whole effort all work to create a wonderful sense of purpose, work and toil. This was a powerful moment to capture.

Even the color shifts here seem to work well with this. The blur, which seems to have been done in post, could be less for my taste, but the image is still impactful and maybe "some" of this makes it that much more so.

Now, I don't think this ruined the photo, but I did find the posture of the horse quite a bit less dynamic, with its feet so close and near vertical but the near perfectly, horizontal nature of the top of the body might be the real culprit here. I felt that this ended up lowering the tension and power of the scene quite a bit. Michael did find a solution in the original comments when he posted a crop where he brought the top of the frame down into the horses body. This eliminated the more restful, horizontal impression of the horse and I think that gave more force to the position of the legs. It also got rid of some superfluous sky, which also helped to focus us on the energy of this man. For myself, as I scrolled down on the image, I don't think I would have eliminate quite as much of the horse as Michael did, probably cutting just a bit into that triangular harness strap, the shape of which I think does help with the dynamics here. (note all the other triangular shapes formed throughout this image as well) This type of change, the cropping from the top, does seem to restore the power lost by its inclusion.

This is a very nice image overall.

Just to stir the pot a little, what does one make of how all the lines from the man's groin lead to, converge on, the de-stallionized, gelded, neutered, castrated private parts of the horse?

Aside from that (LOL), I enjoy the odd cloud behind the man's head and, of course, the horse's flying tail hairs.

If I may add one more element in the picture, which I find compelling and which creates a strong link between the man and the horse and its harness: The red cloth around the waist of the a man and the left harness strap, beautifully curved, bringing our eyes towards the man. One of those small wonders of composition.

The perspective and subject are very compelling. However, the "lens baby/instagramy" look really doesn't work for me. I don't think the image needed to be ginned up with currently popular tricks.

I like this picture. This is a strong diagonal composition with multiple leading lines right to the subject. I like the "worms-eye-view" and how the horse is shown only in part as a framing element. The moment of capture shows the energy and expression of effort of the subject well. Very nice!

The sky could be more interesting and the distribution of lights and darks seem to make this scene a bit bottom heavy but not overly so. The size and position of the horse helps here. The lomo-like edge blur looks done in post. I'm not really a fan of this type of treatment but it does not seem to detract in this scene and does seem to serve as a device to bring the eye into the frame more. In earlier days, we used filters to achieve similar effects. The positive or negative results of such treatment are dependent on the image and degree of application. It doesn't bother me here.

Julie, the image would never had made its way to the POW if the "private parts" of the horse were shown :))
Do horses have "private" parts, anyway ?

"Private parts" is sort of like "passed away": it's nicer than saying "genitals" or "testicles" or "gonads" ... or "dead."

Or maybe it's an American thing. We say "sheep" when it's alive; and "mutton" when we eat it. It's "cow" or "steer" when it's alive and "beef" when it's a burger; it's a pig when it oinks but "pork when we bite it. I am told that the French make no such distinctions.

If one looks back at the original comments, Michael also posted a black and white version which appears to not have the blur applied. I would suggest that this effect wasn't needed here, the emphasis is squarely on this man without any extra device. This blur does take some attention away from the subject, although, a more organic blur might have integrated a bit better--but, as I said, is really not needed, IMO.

Julie, as a matter of fact, the lines do not originate at the man's groin area. They just happen to be near that area; the man is holding them. Nor do the lines converge at the location of the horses's genitals. Although they are near that area, they converge in the vicinity of the horse's rear hips and legs, namely, the horse's locus of power.

Indeed, as Anders and John A. have stated, the story the image tells is of hard, hard work. I don't quite get the need to interpret the image in sexual terms. If castrating a horse entails the horse's losing its power to pull a plow, this issue never would have been created.

To me, it's a strong enough photo that I wouldn't let details get too much in my way. Once I'm drawn in enough to the photo, I give the photographer a lot of latitude in terms of his own creative imprint on or expression in the photo. I guess I don't feel the blur goes far enough or is outrageous enough to be a distraction, so I simply accept it.

The photo is strong. It has a powerful narrative and expresses, to me, determination. Because the horse is chopped off in such a way, I get a more abstract notion of its power than I get a literal read on "horse" or "horse's junk." Interestingly, size-wise in the photo, the man is dwarfed by the horse and yet the man's strength of action allows him a sizable degree of the energy of the photo.

The unreality of the green color as well as the blur seem to want to take me in a somewhat surreal or fantastical direction, which I go with as a relatively unimposing comment by the photographer. It makes it more HIS photo, which I can admire even if it's not particularly to my taste (and I'm not saying whether it is or is not to my taste, because I set my taste aside here because of the strength of the photo).

Michael, don't worry, noone is interpreting the POW in a sexual manner. I just asked an off-topic question concerning "private parts" (which cannot be translate, so it may be an Anglo-Saxon manner) .
Julie, also in French we use different terms for what we eat and the animal : porc and cochon for example.

Of course, there is always Steiglitz image, Spiritual America to add fuel to this discussion. I got the connection immediately and think it might be worthwhile for those interested to read the description on this link.