Untitled

...do you see?

A cacophony or collage of various parts and glimpses. I like the way the way you composed the photo, allowing the miscellaneous geometric shapes and textures to work together to form one rectangular composition. However, as I find the light quite flat, I feel it somehow is lacking in depth, which might have added further interest to this.... Another thing that bothers me slightly is the crop on top...while I understand the need for a directed frame-line, I sort of question the abrupt cut-off of the branches (practically towards their tops). Perhaps a cut more in the middle mass of branches..? I don't know... Just thinking out loud here...

many thanks for your comment and suggestions.

My idea was to 'flatten' the depth to emphasize abstract appearance and turn the focus more on the shapes and their relations. But maybe I should still play a bit more with the tonality of the largest rectangles (e.g. the white wall appears now on PN a bit too greyish).

The scrub I cropped partly as a compromise (I didn't want to have any sky on the photo, more space above would have "opened" the sky above the house in the background on the left) and partly on purpose: in the same way, like the wall hides the scrub from our view, the upper frame of the photo 'hides' it.

Paul Klee in black and white.

Another of your natural assemblages where everything seems to fit together perfectly like a Chinese puzzle. You're very good at these kinds of compositions.

i appreciate it for its simplicity and straight forwardness

I really like this, mostly because of the way my eye can't decide what lies ahead of what.  The part with the tree is especially confounding.

Thanks for explaining, Wolfgang, I better understand your reasoning for the crop. (still think it's worth trying to add a tad more depth to some of the surface textures -- possibly without losing the sense of flatness...?)

many thanks for your comments - they show that this photo works at least to some extent in a way like I intended.

@Marjolein: I've been tinkering with tonalities, but so far not really to my full satisfaction - anyway, here's a slightly less "flat" version (hope, this comes through when attaching small version in comment thread)...

well, caption above should read *less "flat"* - and, seems, differences are not as pronounced as they show in PS :-(