Flow

thoughts?

I like the composition

Eric, your voluminous skies give your work a monumental feel about them. The mirrored reflections also add to this sensation. I'm curious about why the sand pattern leaves an impression as if it is dropping downwards on a slope. Is this a wide angle distortion? Or just an illusion? Your work is a gift to this site and your feedback represents a very important voice on landscapes.

Again the 16mm/ fullframe combo, extremely appealing for me this super wide FOV, great perspective. Very effective here the DOF from near to infinity - my question: did you combine two exposures to increase dynamic range and work out the reflections here, or did you combine an exposure focussed for the near parts with an exposure focussed for the sky (a technique I used sometimes with my G1 to get the almost "hyperfocal" DOF you have with your 1Ds / 16mm) ?

Thanks all for your kind words.

 

This was shot at 20mm, so it is indeed quite wide (generally, I choose the focal length based on the cloud patterns I want to include in a shot like this).

 

David - I can see the 'leaning' effect now that you mention it. I think it is an illusion that is probably partly created by the ultra wide field of view.

 

Carsten - The two exposures are for dynamic range - an alternative to using a graduated neutral density filter. This shot was taken more or less in to the sun which is partly obscured by the thinner clouds nearer the horizon. The differential on the exposures is between 2 and 3 stops. I own a full set of GND's but prefer the much greater control I get by blending exposures.

 

DOF isn't usually too much of a problem at this focal length.

 

Thanks,

Eric

The colour palette is very distinctive as usual, Eric, but the composition doesn't quite have the definition of your other shots from this location. I like your approach of exploring a body of related works (a bit like musical variations) but I suspect that this one is destined to play only a supporting role in that exhibit.

I think I agree with you. To be honest, this one has me a bit mystified. When I saw it through the viewfinder I thought it would be awesome. But I've been pretty ambivalent about it. I feel like it *SHOULD* work, but I'm always left with the feeling that it doesn't quite. Not sure why though. Probably I'll just have to revisit it from time to time.

Very appealing scene. I like the tans and greens in the foreground, and the bird (?) tracks which I didn't notice right away.

From my view, I think it's the bottom third that doesn't quite happen. The footprints are a nice touch though. What I do admire is the consistency of vision you are are demonstrating.

 

In this image though, I do like the almost metallic look to the water. I think this is another recommendation for the digital workflow for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I have not used a film that exhibits this colour palette. Secondly, the degree of exposure control that you derive from blending can't easily be replicated in the film world. My previous attempts at blending scanned 35mm frames couldn't achieve sufficiently accurate registration to make a convincing largish print.

As an element I quite like the foreground - though I realize that textured mud isn't everyone's thing...

 

Here's my current theory on potential problems with this composition. What I was attracted to initially was the way the sweep of the foreground lines complemented the sweep of the clouds and their reflections. I see the composition as primarily consisting of two big sweeping lines starting in the upper right corner and the lower right corner. They meet at the horizon. I think there are then two possible problems - these grand sweeping lines lead to: nothing in particular; and secondly there really isn't much to oppose these lines and add tension.

you have a very distinctive style, great use of leading lines, natural patterns making the most of a simple yet evocative setting - well done