vincetylor

Thanks Pawel. I will look the big file over carefully at 100 percent.

 

John, colors DO sell. Many Photo.net purists roll their eyes however and think it's all photoshop manipulation.

I think I concur Richard that I could live with the dark mountains in the upper portion of the image. By themselves they look fairly natural and acceptable for a sunset. I would also be quite happy with the bright detailed foreground elements here, as many others have expressed. However, the problem lies when the two are put together. There is disharmony -an unnatural blockage- so to speak here that could have been avoided. And yes while a dodging of the the upper half of the scene, and slightly burning the lower portion would certainly help bring these elements together, unfortunately, Dave decided on neither and instead posted it as we see it. So while the image does have some very desirable elements to its credit, the pieces do not quite fit together as we see it here in my minds eye. It's been a nice discussion though. Hopefully we have learned a thing or two along the way.

Re-posted newer version 9-13-05. Thanks for all of your input. And a big thanks to Jay for his editing skills. Aloha.

Re-edited and updated image 9-13-05.

Pawel, help me out here. Are you seeing too much blue in the concrete itself? Is anybody else noticing the same? Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

Yep Lenny, stilts or a ladder, or a 14 mm lens (which would have pushed the background even further away). That is why to me, it works very well even with the tips of the fountain cut off. If I stepped back any further then more concrete would have entered into the foreground. That did not add anything valuable to the scene from my point of view. Like I mentioned earlier, the daytime shot has no great value compared to nightime when the lights go on. I am still very pleased with this image and believe it shows the WW2 memorial in a nice, clean and surprisingly colorful manner. Mahalos!

 

Most images posted on this site would not be sellable as fine-art in my opinion. Not even close in fact. I guess my point Dave is that this particular image here still has a bit going for it. I'd suspect a few people might even pay the bigger bucks for this if it were available as fine-art. Certainly I see this as worth more than just a "ham sandwhich" as you mentioned above. The over-use of the ND grad filter does detract from the professional quality for me. But it does not kill the image entirely, and for many it would not make any difference at all. Basically the areas affected are just too dark.

 

Dave K. has some nice colorful folders. More than just a few are very well composed with dramatic lighting and interesting landscape. I do see a tendency for his images to be somewhat redundant though.

"In fact, I'd be willing to ask, how many of YOU (who've commented here) have a sunset image this powerful, colorful and impactful in your folders? I seriously doubt if any of you have something like this at all." VKT

 

Hold the darts, I take some of that back, there are some very nice sunsets in a few of your folders. The point is though, Ma and Pa snapshooter will likely never come up with something like this on their own as long as they live. This would still be a popular, saleable image in my opinion (to the public) regardless of the technical flaws. There are many here on this site whose images we could not quite say that about regardless of how technically "perfect" they might be...

Well, like everybody else here, I too have a few opinions. Agree with most that the ND was mis-used in this case. In fact, under these circumstances, I am not so sure one was even needed here. For one thing the sun is obscured with a rather thick blanket of cirrus clouds. And secondly, it is setting very low AND practically behind the mountain. Perhaps a .3 ND grad. would work fine, IF any was used at all. Personally, I would have shot this with a .3ND grad, a polarizer exclusively, and then nothing at all. And yes while I'm at it I would have tried a sunset colored graduated filter as well. THEN, after getting the film back and going to the lightbox, I would have many different options to choose from, with a variety of looks, and could then use the one that worked the best for the needed application. There is no way I would just limit myself to this one very strong filter under these type of conditions.

 

However something else needs to be mentioned here: This issue about over-use of an ND is something that most likely would NOT be picked apart, or even noticed by the general population. I am speaking from experience here. If this were for sale as a fine-art print at some gift shop or gallery in Alaska, I would guess it would be a very good selling image just as it's posted here. ONLY we as photographers or professional editors would even recognize this is a problem at all. I have seen junk sell to the buying public on a regular basis. Think about it, how many "Joe Tourists" are going to come up with something like this image in their entire lifetime? In fact, I'd be willing to ask, how many of YOU (who've commented here) have a sunset image this powerful, colorful and impactful in your folders? I seriously doubt if any of you have something like this at all. Trust me, I've been around for a while, and you don't see many like this even with the obvious technical flaws. Does Dave deserve the knocks he's getting for this image? Well, yes he does, especially if he chooses to post on a site like this where other professionals and hobbyists alike are available to critique. Hopefully, if you are watching this Dave, you will use this as an opportunity to learn from your mistakes anad actually welcome the feedback that will help you to improve the next time you do pick up a camera. For what it's worth I also think the composition is outstanding here, as is the case with many images in your folder. But as you can read above, it's not just about composition or color. There are technical issues involved that could take this one to another level. Hopefully you will see this as an opportunity to do just that!

LM, your visits are always appreciated. I am sure you know that. Like mentioned above however, I still believe to capture the very top of the fountain, I would have to give away even more of the memorial to the blue sky. However, I do agree that it is an issue to most here. So, I will look over that series again one day soon. Thanks a ton.

While the TYPE of shots Patrick takes may not be the most original (landscapes, seascapes, sunsets etc.), the high degree of beauty OF those shots is. So when one takes an average subject, but makes it into something really spectacular, that then becomes something original when compared to the thousands of others in its genre... at least in my mind anyway.

 

Perhaps Dave, you as a professional may not be interested in buying or even looking more than once at Patrick's work. However, I can assure you that you would be in the minority. I too am a professional, and I'd be more than willing to put one of his better photographs into my home. Same goes for your work. I think we can all appreciate excellent quality when we see it. When I look at Patrick's folder, I definitely "see it". When I look at this particular image however, I don't.

Carl, in my mind, the very small amount of reflection at the bottom makes the entire image lose its balance. There needs to be more of it or none at all. The fact that the reflection near the center is rather muddy is another problem for me entirely. This image is just not that good on its own, but when compared to some of Patrick's other work, is rather average at best.

 

IMHO...

Thanks Brian. Gotta love them! Aloha.

Patrick has many outstanding images in his folders. However, I would not consider this as anywhere close to one of his better ones. It's an okay shot as the ratings on this would verify. While the lighting on the subject is rather nice, what else about this really stands out? There is an imbalance to this image created by the reflection of the branch. There needs to be more of that reflection to really make the composition on this one work. Also, the ripples (as mentioned above) do not help this either. There are also buildings visible in the background, as well as an almost blurred appearance in the middle of the image due to the less than calm waters, which I am sure would have been preferred by Patrick.

 

 

 

So what does this leave us with then; nice lighting, and that's really about it. Go to his folders for some really excellent images. This -in my opinion- is just not one of them.

Like Walter, I too can no longer post in the site feedback section. Brian had us both banned because of voicing our opinions very effectively. Made his policies look as they are, ridiculous and steps backwards. Guess he did not like that...

 

Question: Why wouldn't ALL anonymous rates be counted in the default TRP rate recent average views?????

 

Agree with Walter and yourself that the ratings system is plain-ole-stupid at best. Brian has been trying to find ways to outslick the mate-raters while ruining the system that was in place before he arrived. There is nothing you can do about it either.

 

Nice work here by the way. I really like how you composed this. The placement of the sun in the right corner really makes this nearly perfect! Wonderful atmosphere.

Thanks for sharing your opinions. Regarding cutting off the top of the fountain; Even like it is now, I almost feel I've given the fountain possibly too much importance here. There is already more sky in the scene than I would like, but it seems to work just enough because I have (just about) all of the fountain in the image, plus it allows for a more colorful image. At least enough of the spray is in the scene -in my mind- to avoid the feeling of being chopped. If you scroll up you can see how much a mid-stream crop-chop would take away from this. You can easily recognize that you are at least near the end of the spray, so I think. There was no other way to get more spray without minimizing the rest of the scene unless I brought a ladder... And I was already warned about using a tripod without the rubber tips on an earlier trip. I literally had to place empty film containers on the bottom of my tripod legs to continue shooting. Doubt, I could get away with a ladder over there...

 

Yes Lou Anne I shot this from each side of the memorial at 17mm to get as much of the scene and fountain in as possible. The dusk shots were much closer-in however. Marketing in DC is going to be challenging since I do live (and plan to continue...heh) 5000 miles away. However, I already have some leads on distributing companies in that area. I've shown a few vendors over there our end-products and am reasonably certain they'd do just as well with DC images as our Hawaiian market with Hawaiian images has. Thanks again for taking the time. It always helps.

 

PS- The Photo.net ratings system for me Walter has become totally meaningless and is a sad result of MIS-management. So, nothing is new...

Actually shooting this in the bright daylight was not really even seriously considered. I focused more on the dusk shots which perhaps are more dramatic during my three visits to this memorial. Still needing to finish editing some of those. I was quite surprised when I found the waters here were actually colorful with my polarizer. This was at the very end of my two week shooting trip which primarily was centered on the Blue Ridge mountains of Shenandoah National Park during Fall colors. So I was down to my last roll of Velvia 50 and a little burned out. Nevertheless, I was able to get something out of this location that I feel worked. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

Vikram, I used a polarizer and did not notice any unusual glare. However I did change monitors, so if you see something significant, feel free to help me out. If I bumped up the contrast any more, I feel like I might start to lose the whites. I guess I could clone the little leaf out Walt, but I sort of like it in there... being October and all. It is a leaf, right??

Taken last Fall at 17mm. I shot many angles and focal lengths, but

seemed drawn to this side to give the viewer an idea what this place

is like. With many images from Washington DC, I hope to be marketing

over there soon. Any opinions are always appreciated.

Neither crop works for me. Not even close. Even as an abstract.

 

The free flowing movement that the cropped out portion brings is essential to this image having any success in my opinion. It completes or in my mind, or makes the image work. It was never a great image to begin with, but something alive, and somewhat original. You have taken away that portion so the image subsequently dies with the crop in my mind. Along with Lannie, we will just have to agree to disagree. Probably not the last time either, but not always the case. Aloha.

Dennis, you have very nice articulation skills. Thanks for taking the time.

Interesting Dennis, I just re-read you initial comment far above. Seems you've had a complete change of heart rather than just "a few additional impressions". Seems the very things you liked about the photograph initially, are now "compositional flaws".

 

You initially said this:" It seems that the image is open to several interpretations. Is the woman?s alter-ego represented by the entity represented by the frozen water or is she being stalked by its presence? She almost appears to be morphing into another shape." Dennis Dixon

 

Guess you will never know since you now propose cutting her out completely. Unless of course "blurred legs" exclusively work for you. I wonder why the very thing that makes this work before, now needs to be cut out entirely?? hmmm...

 

You also said this about the photo: "Pretty nice in-camera effect, it looks like your persistence paid off. For some reason I am now overcome by the urgent need to purchase a flavored performance enhancing sport drink." Dennis Dixson

 

and now you say: "I think the suggested crops are a valid means for strengthening the photograph by removing several compositional flaws." and "Close cropping removes a lot of distracting elements like the blown out highlights and the shadows along the top of the frame."

"What part of the image makes this a success? If you were forced to crop 3/4 of the image, what part would you leave? There's no question; it's the distorted view of her legs. Period." Carl Root

 

 

"If we can't agree on what the purpose of the shot is, then the discussion comes to a screeching halt." Carl R.

 

Your opinions sound more like facts here Carl. Sorry but most disagree with you. Your (and Michael's) opinion that this NEEDS a crop to emphasize what you believe is the most important element in this photograph (distortion of the legs) is simply not being accepted by myself nor really anybody but you and Michael. Both myself, Lannie and many others have explained why we believe the crops take away rather than improve from the success of this image. It takes away the "human" element, sense of "movement", "dynamic interaction" "freshness" "visually interesting and that it invokes a feeling" "everything works together... good, bad and the ugly" etc etc.. Sure that part of the image is important, but in my opinion, it is not strong enough the carry this image by itself. You would be cropping away other relevant portions of what makes this succeed. Perhaps if you offered a better solution, we'd be more willing to accept your thoughts this time around.

Nice and simple. We can all use more of that in our lives. I think the blue sky up top is a nice touch. Looks like a longer exposure, but still no waves on the shoreline at all. Must be a lake. Nice job Jay. Your work continues to get better. Aloha.

So which is it Carl? Did I not share enough reasons why I DO like this image? Your complaint keeps changing. Why?

 

As is plain to see I have shared what I do like about this as well as what I do not like about your and Michael's suggested crops. I also said I thought this was a refreshingly successful idea, and the photographer's patience and creative eye were rewarded with a very nice capture. If I wanted to say more, don't you think I am capable and would have done so. You might also remember my comment about this not being "truly spectacular" so perhaps you can better understand why my commendations may appear to you to be somewhat limited. As you must also know by now, your suggested crops sparked a bit more specific of an opinion. They just don't quite make this one work for me at all. Sorry.

"It's easy to pick apart someone else's concept of how an idea should be interpreted photographically, but much harder to articulate what you think the photographer sees or what you see." Carl Root

 

Well, lets see here, Michael posted that the head should be cropped off entirely, you Carl thought even more should go, and I disagree.

 

"Cropping the head and or shoulders does nothing in my mind to improve this, sorry. It becomes impossible to distinguish anything significant and in essence would make this a dead shot."

 

 

"She is leaning forward, hand behind her, foot off the ground, walking in a girly manner that seems somewhat cute. Take off the head, or even further as you suggest, you have nothing more than blurred legs. The image falls apart entirely."

 

more

 

"With Carl's crop Lannie, I see nothing distinguishable. It just does not work for me at all. Just a blur. With Michael's (artist-instructor) crop I cannot get beyond the missing head issue. It's been chopped off."

 

How about:

 

"Regardless whether Tomasz planned this out ahead of time or walked into this and figured it out, it takes a good, creative eye to pull it off successfully. And this, in my mind, he has done. After reading his comment above, we can see this was the result of much patience and his recognizing the potential it offered."

 

 

I simply did not like your severe crop suggestion, and articulated.

 

[Carl's and Vincent's comments: Edited by moderator to remove personal attacks. Further personal attacks will result in temporary vacations from the POW]

"it is my basic premise to making stronger art. I'm not into pretty, I'm into strong" Michael S. (artist-intructor)

 

I certainly respect the idea of strengthening am image. I just fail to see where that happened in this case. Chopping off her head really was not an improvement here in my honest opinion. However presenting that idea does make it interesting.

 

Swish...