philmorris

Hmmm. Though a typical grand view of yours and composed to good effect, I'm having difficulty with this one. The foreground tones seem almost identical to the tones behind the focal outcrop. The similarity doesn't assist perspective. Plus (ignoring the snow) the tones on offer seem contained within a narrower band than usual. I can see there's some light on the scene but I'm not sure it's assisted in lifting anything in particular off the page. That might be down to choice of filter or even exposure. Ideally I think I want the light on the outcrop to sing, with all around dimmed in subservience.

 

What do you think?

My kind of shot also; light and airy with an attractive range of tones. Compositionally, I like how, at the left and right edges, the trees lean backwards to encourage me to venture into the heart of the picture.

Lovely view and tonality. Hail to little pocketable Olympus cameras.

Tack sharp and looking pretty much bomb proof in the design department.

Thanks for your pair of comments Bala and Colin. I'd have to say you're both correct with your second ones. I can see where you're coming from with your second Bala. To just take the viewer and plonk him on an outcrop to show him the scenery will not be as memorable for the viewer as it was for the climber. The picture shows the climb but not the experience. The flood of sunshine has may be shut out the roar of the wind, perhaps rendering the viewpoint akin to a picnic spot. I can't think how I could inject more soul without it becoming less realistic. Being faithfully realistic is then perhaps its undoing. I have learnt that I shouldn't always wait for a ray of sunshine. Knowing when to wait and when to fear it is quite a skill to master. This would have been a completely different picture shot amid a thunderstorm. As for your second one Colin, yes, I'd re-experience this first thing tomorrow if I was given just half a chance. Perhaps I should pray for rain!

As I was working on this I was thinking to myself that it would hopefully appeal to your sensitivities John. A bleak, inhospitable mood was indeed the motivation for the photograph (as well as a fine view to the top of England). I experienced it trying to keep the camera (and me!) steady in the wind. What's more as I look at the work you have done on my picture, so I recognise the patterns of new brightness are placed precisely over where I had been dodging, once again emphasising to me that I am perhaps a little reserved in my approach.

 

Thanks as always John; for your little pearls one may say!

Thanks for all the nice and thoughtful remarks here - especially to Darko for his extra special efforts. Cheers.

 

I follow what you say Leigh. The river you can see is Mickleden Beck, its final descent into Great Langale being obscured by a shoulder of Green Tongue, behind which it meets with Oxendale Beck. I might have gone over to that shoulder where I expect I would have seen the two becks join together. I'd probably have got Mickleden running to the left corner with a 50mm or even perhaps an 80, but I don't think I would have gotten an unlit portion of rock in the lower right since, as can be seen, the sunlight was pouring through the valley of Oxendale and would have lit up the ridge climbing up this way. Besides, my main preoccupation at this time was to compress the scene so as to contain the S sweep, entering lower left and exiting upper right with no sky and only fells to contain it.

 

Also, as Darko suggests, somewhere firm to place the feet was limited. To get as much of Mickleden in the frame as possible I've moved to the very edge of the traverse. Indeed it was moments after I set up for this photo that my friend's bag took a stroll 200 feet down the fellside trashing his cellphone and N65. You have to be careful.

 

I understand Russ's point about the dark foreground dominating. I agree it does stand out. I rather liked that feature because it emphasised the tonal range as well as the perspective. That said, cropping the lowest 10% would go some way to achieving the effect Russ desires without interfering with the beck's entry lower left. I'm a square freak just like Steve, but I'll still think about that one.

 

John's point about the light leaking through Oxendale is most valid. I'd tried burning that somewhat in any case and guess I could be a little fiercer.

 

Thanks Arif, Steve and Alex. Colour will soon be available!

Thanks for the comments here. Metering was tricky as you can imagine since I wanted detail in the facing (shaded) tree trunks and clouds. Managing it is one of the attractions of black and white's extended latitude. I'm pleased that folks find the tones satisfactory. I've had this pickie knocking around for a few months and couldn't make my mind up about the tones. I was doubtful (and remain so if I'm honest) that there's something of a muddy soup in the midrange, particularly where shaded foliage meets foliage lit from below by the streaking sunshine.

Thanks here. At the moment I think it depends on the time of day. If I look at this picture on PN at midday the blacks look featureless. If I look at it at night with the room lights off details emerge. Actually, when I look at it in PS it ain't too bad either. But these latter scenarios are still unsatisfactory. I don't imagine the high class gallery that will be exhibiting this picture will thank me for insisting that viewing will be restricted to the hours between 8:00pm and 4:00am :)

 

I reckon PN somehow darkens pictures a touch; though there's no getting around that this is (deliberately) high contrast. The detail is there. I'll subdue it over the tree trunks whilst still seeking to maintain the initial impact of high contrast, and then offer it up as a revised version.

I like the tight crop. It reflects a close rubbing of shoulders. And that the top of the one boat is missing doesn't matter to me. It's part and parcel of the shoulder rubbing crop and reflects the choppiness of the tide evident in the spray. The view through to the silos is essential for two reasons I believe, in that it adds depth to the picture (the white edging works wonders for this) and secondly enforces a commercial over leisurely role for the vessels.

 

The stormy sky cooperates in a depiction of work whatever the elements. I sense that if these ships wore shirts their sleeves would be rolled up.

 

It is a shame the sky revealed here was not originally available.

I saw this picture a few days or so ago and thought how fine the tones were. I think the cloudy sky and far tree foliage especially delicate and detailed. Of course the main tree is an interesting subject all by itself and appeals to the enquiring mind. Put that lot together in one little square and you've got yourself a great big picture. Allowing myself one tiny niggle, I think the contrast between near tree root and sandy shore might be a wee bit stronger (ie the root gets a little burning). And, if you're going to be setting up not too far from the car, I think it a smart thing to carry a dust pan and soft brush in the boot. you can use it to clear up fags and crisp packets and (as in this case) to smooth out unwanted foot prints.

 

Then I noticed you enquired about composition. Well I think it difficult to complain about the composition here. All I can do is go through the things that would have crossed my mind, though in all likelihood they were considered by you but were found unworkable. As one example, ideally I think I would like to see the main tree thrust vertically midway between the trees on the river bank, rather than with this bias for one side. But then there are all the other considerations that might upset the pluses you've already got. I'm thinking of the near root growing forwards toward the lower right corner and the consequent visual line thru to the far tree midway up on the left, from which you join the sweep of the river bank; in addition the thrust of the trunk midway along the top margin. You wouldn't want to mess with that.

 

To be honest I'm wondering why you wouldn't be confident with the composition. As I said I think it difficult to complain about.

Thanks Steve. Were it not for the 95mm diam thread on these 40mm lenses I'd have been tempted. I don't have any problems with fuzz or distortion or vignetting caused by filters on the 50mm. My only problem at the moment is that I need a dedicated hood. I got the 65-80mm hood second hand thinking/hoping it would be OK for the 50. It ain't. So at the moment I tend to use sheet maps as a sunshield!

Hi Arthur. The lighting is ordinary daylight coming in around early evening (7:00pm ish) and at a 1 o'clock angle. I was limited to moving the tripod along this narrow strip of shade cast by a scaffolding pole. An inch out and I got flare everywhere. I don't have any lights of my own.

 

The scan is from a regular Epson 2450 (scan at 2400 dpi). I've read so many suggestions the Epson flatbeds are second rate. Probably they are. But I reckon I must have been lucky and got myself a decent one.

any opinion gratefully received.

I second Fred's opinion. Good composition / crop and tones. Nice dark spaces. I even like the title. It's still anonymous (assuming this is not Mr and Mrs Pascual).

Love the way you got the wall slightly imperfect vertically and the muted, melancholic colouring. Best of all, the wavy white paint to meet with the cloud.

Uncle Geoff's is great. Built on the side of his garage at the back of his end terraced house in Over Haddon, Derbyshire, you can have a cuppa and a large slice of apple pie for the spare change in your pocket. If you don't mind the squeeze, there's just enough room for sixteen. The added "interest" is that poor old Geoff is mutton jeff. Roll in there and start spouting a list of the goodies you'd like and he'll give you a pad and pencil.

Thank you for the comments here. I too have a nagging doubt about the presence of the "modern" feature to the left of the picture. I decided to keep it in because without it the enquiring viewer would be left with a question as to how the arch was supported. I also liked the domestic touch - the note left under the stone. And talking of small details, has anyone noticed the pussy cat?

In the main I'm not at all happy with electricity pylons in pictures. There are numerous photos of mine with them just out of eye shot. That's because they litter the fields around my way. chances are it's the same where you live. I resolved to surrender to them in the right circumstances and when this trio lined up I thought here was my chance. The picture couldn't be taken for the aesthetics of the land alone and I set about creating the picture by recalling the annoyance I had for pylons. I fixed a red filter; a filter which gives me the most problems. And I stopped down to f/22, giving me a 1 sec exposure. Then I waited for a good gust of wind, all the better for the picture to contain evidence of the disturbance. I wasn't quite getting what I wanted with smooth ISO 100 film so after some trials introduced a little extra grain through Photoshop.

 

I'm glad the trio stimulate thoughts of times past and present; of the ages of wind and electric power. I had similar thoughts about wood, stone and steel. As long as thoughts other than "ugh clone that pylon", were provoked, I feel the halt at this point was worth it.

Yes this one has been tragically overlooked despite the request to critters corner. The use of lighting is delicious and not dissimilar from that displayed in "Great Southern Ocean" (a photo with a rather good title I thought, but which inspired precious little feedback). The same can be said of the design and use of shape.

 

More often than not I'm miffed by the appearance of background haze restricting front to back viewing, but in this case I think it has served the dual purpose of focusing attention on the the lit ridge and also providing a complimentary colour to run along side the cornfields.

... And The Shallows is a nice looking picture 'n all.

I'm surprised no one has pulled in to leave a remark on this little beauty. I think you've cropped this vey well. And I think enclosing the colour detail within the bands of ocean and ominous gray cloud goes further to enhance the panoramic. Which is all very well because the picture is about horizontally stretched clouds and land formations. Oh and not forgetting the most horizontal of the lot, the ocean itself. I think the placement of the sunbeams on the right hand margin well judged too. Its an extreme position to either sweep in or out of the picture and maximises the journey length across the picture. Finally a word about the colours. Lovely. And though I described the colour detail as within the bands, in truth the bands themselves contain colour detail after a fashion. I especially like the appearance of sea spray and the softening light to reveal a smaller, similarly shaped island probably miles away.

Behel, I was wondering about converging lines. Two straight parallel lines will seem to get closer together the further the lines travel away from the viewer. The effect is called convergence. In the two Motovun gate shots I've uploaded, they both contain tiers, one travelling to the left, the other travelling to the right of the picture, with them both appearing to come together at a viewing point occupied by a foreground concrete pillar. A sort of anti-convergence perhaps. I wanted to display the tiers in both pictures whilst holding the gate itself as the primary subject. But to be able to do this a concrete pillar insisted on appearing pretty much in the middle foreground. So this convergence / anti-convergence thing got in my head and I wondered how the compositional aspects were considered by others. On the whole I favour lines converging in the bskground rather than the foreground. I suspect it has its roots in the ability of the viewer to travel comfortably through the picture.

 

Behel, I began by trying to assist with an explanation. I suspect as I have pondered over John's "struggling to articulate why" I've gone and made things just as complicated as they were before!

 

John, thanks for your input. Behel, anything you're not clear on, let me know in english :)

Thanks very much for the comments here. Yes there is a preponderence of yellow in this picture, but I think it an entirely natural, unforced product of the local stone (limestone I suspect) and cement rendering. I'm always grateful to those property owners who do not call for an emergency mason the moment a sliver of plaster falls off the wall. Or who, when the necessary moment has arrived, decide on a patch up job rather than a full on rebuild.

 

As for the composition, I don't think a viewer would find a dominant focal point (though if I settle any where, it's the reflection of the roof tiling in the door glazing). Rather, I imagined it as a picture with interest above and below stairs, with the stairs as a means of travelling about. I agree that I failed to get everything neatly inside the box and as with most sets, a compromise was required. I decided the staircase should reach a landing before reaching the upper right corner. And I also felt that any more than one door in the picture would set up a door fight. So the top right door was kinda squeezed. Incidentally you can just make out the beginnings of a window cill in the top left, so extending upwards for more door introduced even more "wall furniture". Ideally, there would have been a litle more room at the foot of the stairs too. Only I wanted a geometric look to the shot and had I allowed more room to the left the picture would have included a slice looking up a street. It would have changed from 2-D to 3-D. The geometric thing I was interested in, this above and below stairs, came from the door and the massive plant holder. The area occupied by the door glazing was about the same as that of the plant holder, and I imagined this dance between the two; how they were interchangeable. Thanks very much for the cropping suggestion John. I'm always pleased to hear others' thoughts and ideas.

Thanks, Jakub, John. I appreciate your time.