Hi Don, for me at least, the reflection in foreground first creates the impression that it is earth, and then eyes madly search for the river and spot the water at distance that looks like tiny pond, and then brain does the math and realizes that the reflection in the foreground is water also, and hence together they are a river. The non-foreground-reflection portion of the picture is beautiful and after a long long time, just made me crave desert. JMO....always supposed to be taken with a handful of salt.
It makes me dizzy and messes with my head. Did you intend that?
Would I do that? Anyway, no. One reason I posted this is that I've gone back and forth on it. At times I think it's beautiful, at times I think it's weird (and not in a good way). I needed some more objective reactions. Thanks for yours.
Circular polarizer filter could make a difference if so desired. You would have 2 options. It could darken the frame and add natural contrast and get rid of reflections or it could further brighten the water and blow out scene more, making it perhaps over-exposed dreamy feel that people seem to love for portraits. Cheers!
Well I like your work Don, but I'm having trouble with this image. The foreground is just too confusing when compared to the serene landscape behind.
-Len
A lot going in this image. Often a simple image with few elements can make an impact almost immediately. The more I look at this image the more I like. It took looking at the larger image and a few minutes.
Multiple subjects - all along the rule of thirds (I usually dislike using this term, but it seems appropriate here) Water, shrubs and boulders.
And each has own texture: smoothness - river, tangled lines - bushes, roughness - boulders.
Reflections of the shrubs pulls you back to the front of the image.
Highlighted shrubs contrast with shadows below and light shade across.
I would like to see a little more pop to the image - perhaps a little different post processing or ND filter as mentioned above.
For this image, I think I would have added a little more saturation and vibrance in LR and played with Levels in PS.
I am not into HDR, but I wonder about its use here.
Len, thanks for the comment. I'm never bothered by a polite, negative response. I've never found the image confusing, but then I know the place, and I know that it was a long exposure with a nine-stop ND, and I filter what I see through that knowledge. It's helpful to know that others don't see what I see.
Phil, I appreciate the thoughtful critique. This scene didn't need HDR, but some of your processing suggestions make sense. I think a tad more mid-tone contrast might help.
Comments
Gallery: http://cornflakeaz.smugmug.com/
Would I do that? Anyway, no. One reason I posted this is that I've gone back and forth on it. At times I think it's beautiful, at times I think it's weird (and not in a good way). I needed some more objective reactions. Thanks for yours.
Gallery: http://cornflakeaz.smugmug.com/
-Len
Multiple subjects - all along the rule of thirds (I usually dislike using this term, but it seems appropriate here) Water, shrubs and boulders.
And each has own texture: smoothness - river, tangled lines - bushes, roughness - boulders.
Reflections of the shrubs pulls you back to the front of the image.
Highlighted shrubs contrast with shadows below and light shade across.
I would like to see a little more pop to the image - perhaps a little different post processing or ND filter as mentioned above.
For this image, I think I would have added a little more saturation and vibrance in LR and played with Levels in PS.
I am not into HDR, but I wonder about its use here.
Thanks for posting.
"You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
Phil
Phil, I appreciate the thoughtful critique. This scene didn't need HDR, but some of your processing suggestions make sense. I think a tad more mid-tone contrast might help.
Gallery: http://cornflakeaz.smugmug.com/