Pebble Beach Moonscape

Constructive Criticism appreciated. Thank you.

I've never shot anything like this, so it's hard for me to critique. I do like it. I like the roughness of the stone against the calmness of the water, and I like how what appears to be rocks under the water almost look like reflections of clouds in the sky. I like the way this photograph shows the passage and the effects of centuries. It might be just a tad oversharpened.

Thank you, Jim, for taking the time to actually comment and for your kind words. The photo is not sharpened at all. It is a fairly high res scan(1200dpi) from a 4x5 neg, and I am new to scanning, so I may have made some other mistake. Thanks again, Michael.

I guess what made me think "a tad oversharpened" is the slight white "halo" around some of the rock edges where they meet the water, but I'm sure there could be other reasons for it as well. Whatever it is, it really doesn't detract from the image...it's just a minor detail I noticed...not thinking of it as a mistake at all.

 

1200 is good to scan. I usually scan a 4x5 neg in at 1600, and sometimes even 3200, though 3200 makes a big file and slows down the scan a lot.

 

I'd be interested to know tech stats on this shot...camera, lens, exposure, etc., etc.

 

 

Jim, it's a Cambo SCII with a Caltar II 210 f5.6, the sun is low in the sky near sunset, at low tide, I suppose technically this is a tidepool. And from memory this is probably 4-6 secs @f16 with a stop or 2 for bellows and 1-1 1/2 for reciprocity failure. And an increase of 20-25% dev time for Tri-x which I exposed at asa200 in 2 solution Ethol TEC. I always shot close ups at f16 or f22 and whatever shutter speed it worked out to(regularly 2-16 secs). This neg is slightly underexposed as there isn't too much detail in the dark rock at the right edge. In a sliver print there is just enough detail barely to make a beautiful print, and in digital it's muddy. So far anyway. Thanks for your interest. Michael.