Jump to content

cloudland canyon - no.1


jgalyon

From the category:

Fine Art

· 71,602 images
  • 71,602 images
  • 306,988 image comments


Recommended Comments

Amazing image John... striping this composition down to the essential elements makes it very powerful and graceful at the same time.

 

Mike

 

Link to comment

Thomas and Paolo... thank you for viewing and commenting!

 

Mike...thank you as well. Glad you like the treatment. I'm definitely in the school of "less is more"...at least, sometimes! :)

Link to comment
Well John, looks like I'm probably the only one who's going to disagree here, not that I mind that of course. Altough I can appreciate what I think you're trying to do here, for me this is a case of going way to far. It looks more like an effect for it's own sake. Besides, you've lost too much detail here which could have really helped here. That rock for instance on the right you've darkened too much. Also that little bush in the top of your photo doesn't only add a thing but to in my view is rather distracting. I'm sure you can get a lot more out of this. Regards, Ton
Link to comment
I respectfully disagree with Ton, and here's why. As the photo is presently presented, I see it as more of an abstract than a nature shot. While it is clear that it is a waterfall, I think the specifics of the location take a backseat to the general form of the falling water. I think if more details are visible, it becomes a more ordinary (albeit pretty) nature shot, which would make it less unique and interesting.
Link to comment
Ton...your disagreement is welcome! :) i must point out that in viewing the photo as it's present image size...all things aren't as they might appear. what appears to be a bush, is actually stone with a bit of light reflection. if you notice, the stone goes behind the water... be it bush or stone, i'm now considering eliminating it...as it may be, as you said...distracting. on a full-screen view...it has a different effect, so ...my mind is not yet fully decided on that one. as for the "effect'...for effect's sake, would you mind elaborating on that? what effect do you perceive that i have in mind? just want to be clear on that before i respond with a comment that may have no relevance. i must say that Doug's comments pretty well sum up what i had in mind for this shot. i could elaborate on that...but there's not much need, as he nailed my intended purpose of the photograph. if in the end...we still disagree on this one, please know that your input is always welcome and considered to be of value. we all need to be pushed to think and see in different directions. if this were not the case...what would be the point of submitting our work for critique? :)
Link to comment
It's odd that this seems almost more like light being poured from heaven than a simple waterfall. A transcendent abstraction, John.
Link to comment
Having read the critiques, and being somewhat knowledgible about your entire ouvre, John, I lean more towaeds Doug's comments. It is an "effect", so to speak, but that "effect" is the goal of the image, same as the "effect" is the goal of a Picasso or Monet. I think we have seen our share of pretty waterfalls here at pnet, but a presentation like this, echoeing Jeff's words,is something that says less "waterfall" than "ray of light". As always, I think the conversation is stimulating, and serves as a wonderful compliment to what is a rather remakable work of art.
Link to comment
Another fine example of an image that shows the more simplistic view, but this time it is of something grand and beautiful. The other 99% of the photographers would all show similar versions of the beautiful falls, but you are different and I love the difference that you can show us. This year I will make an effort to learn something from your examples.
Link to comment
emmanuel and Shawn - I'd be hard pressed to find any other photographers whose comments would be more appreciated than from you two gentlemen! a humble thank you...
Link to comment
very interesting shot. under the long exposure the waterfall seem not so real and has an abstract character. regards.
Link to comment
John, I am a big fan and love this image. But for the sake of discussion with an excellent artist, my body seems to be battling the near center placement of the fall and feels almost distracted with what "feels" like negative space. But I do not see how this could be cropped any better. I apologize for this odd comment.
Link to comment

Wayne,

First of all...I've been away from the site (almost entirely) for more than a month, so I'm just beginning to catch up with correspondence. I don't think your comment or your reaction to the cropping of this picture is odd at all ! Actually, you wouldn't believe how much deliberation, fretting that was spent on the composition/cropping of this one. I don't ascribe to a strict "no centering" rule...and although the center portion of the falls is a bit left of center, the smaller to the right, as well as the small cascades at the bottom tends to draw a lot of attention to the right side of the photo...and accentuates the negative space to the left. So...I wish the main portion of the falls were positioned a little further to the left to offset this visual effect a bit more. I'm sure I realized this at the time I worked on this shot...and it seems that this was the best option I had. I'll have to go back and try to find this file and see if I can improve on the original. I've never been fully satisfied with the crop myself. Always feel free to offer criticism and suggestions! I'm going to be tied up a bit the next few days, but I'd like to spend some time browsing through your portfolio and enjoying your work as well...john

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...