SF1 - candidates

annnna8888

I've been struggling with time and inspiration to come up with a worthy submission for the semifinal. I'd appreciate your input as to which one you prefer - and why, if you care to elaborate.


#1



#2



#3



#4



#5



#6




Thanks!

Ana

sunita

I like #4 and 5 the most. The house really stands out and panoramic-like feel adds to the effect.

I'm not so sure about 1-3. The misty feeling is nice but it seems to lack contrast.

In #6 the foreground appears to be lit - but it doesn't create an interesting effect, whereas it would make for a stronger image if the sun lit up the valley instead.

Hope this helps!
Sunita

pyroPrints.com

annnna8888 wrote:

I've been struggling with time and inspiration to come up with a worthy submission for the semifinal. I'd appreciate your input as to which one you prefer - and why, if you care to elaborate.

Ana

some struggle lol

#2 is very nice but it needs "pop"

#s 4,5,6 are all exelent esp. #6

in the end I vote 6

seastack

You know I love your work and I really want to like a lot of these images but most just don't quite pop somehow. I find myself wishing for a long lens in #1 to focus in on the hilltop buillding with fog shrouded forest in the background. That would be the wow factor.

Of all these #4 is my favorite. I would crop it tighter (in from the left) and not worry about the well on the right. It would better offset the church and the tree and boil the image down to its essence - church, tree and sky. There is a small problem however with the sloping ground at the base of the church, to me it tends to make the building look like it's tilting forward down the hill. If you rotate image clockwise, then the horizon would be thrown off. Not sure if this is a big deal, and not sure it could be corrected either. The bare ground is also unattractive, which could be fixed in PS.

I understand the perspective in #5 with the fence, and the light/color on the building is better because of position, but it's the wrong side of the building showing unfortunately. A tighter crop would help.

BistiArt

Where did that 3rd rule get away to?

annnna8888 wrote:

Ana

It takes Comcast to eval these images...

I like the sense of fog and some of the linears which came subtly out in the shots.
But, I find the 3rds rule could be more strictly adhered to; then the emphasis would be stronger.

Of the shots, I like the one with the well in front of the church...

I could not tell if you were able to PS for more subtle blends...

annnna8888

sunita wrote:

I like #4 and 5 the most. The house really stands out and panoramic-like feel adds to the effect.

I'm not so sure about 1-3. The misty feeling is nice but it seems to lack contrast.

In #6 the foreground appears to be lit - but it doesn't create an interesting effect, whereas it would make for a stronger image if the sun lit up the valley instead.

Hope this helps!
Sunita

Thanks!
I said I was struggling. The first three photos were taken before dawn and due to weak light there was no contrast to speak of in the original files. The histogram was a small hill in the middle.
Thanks again for your feedback!

Ana

annnna8888

pyroPrints.com wrote:

some struggle lol

#2 is very nice but it needs "pop"

#s 4,5,6 are all exelent esp. #6

in the end I vote 6

Thanks! As I said before, the original photos were totally uncontrasty and these are already heavily post-processed. I do find it interesting that the feedback about #6 that I got from my friends and colleagues has varied from wow to nothing special. I'm glad you like it though.

Ana

annnna8888

seastack wrote:

You know I love your work and I really want to like a lot of these images but most just don't quite pop somehow. I find myself wishing for a long lens in #1 to focus in on the hilltop buillding with fog shrouded forest in the background. That would be the wow factor.

Of all these #4 is my favorite. I would crop it tighter (in from the left) and not worry about the well on the right. It would better offset the church and the tree and boil the image down to its essence - church, tree and sky. There is a small problem however with the sloping ground at the base of the church, to me it tends to make the building look like it's tilting forward down the hill. If you rotate image clockwise, then the horizon would be thrown off. Not sure if this is a big deal, and not sure it could be corrected either. The bare ground is also unattractive, which could be fixed in PS.

I understand the perspective in #5 with the fence, and the light/color on the building is better because of position, but it's the wrong side of the building showing unfortunately. A tighter crop would help.

Thanks, Tom, for the detailed feedback!

I struggled with the pop. The photos were taken before dawn, it was dark and the fields with the mist were quite a distance below the hill where I was shooting from.

The fisheye lens and its effects - sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. It's almost impossible to avoid the building looking like they are going to topple over unless you hold the camera perfectly in line with the horizon. I did try to correct it in post, but not too much, otherwise the wide angle effect is lost.

And now that you mention it, I do have some tighter crops of the chapel:

#7



#8


Do these seem better?
My head is spinning from looking at all these misty and HDR photos!

Ana

annnna8888

BistiArt wrote:

It takes Comcast to eval these images...

I like the sense of fog and some of the linears which came subtly out in the shots.
But, I find the 3rds rule could be more strictly adhered to; then the emphasis would be stronger.

Of the shots, I like the one with the well in front of the church...

I could not tell if you were able to PS for more subtle blends...

Thanks, Joe!

First of all, what is Comcast?

I know - I don't always follow the rule of the thirds as I don't think this is always necessary to achieve the desired effect. Could you please tell me which photos, in your opinion, would benefit from it more?

Ana

LiquidAir

I am leaning toward #4 or #5. I like the well in the forground of #5, but the large area of grass in the foreground feels kind of heavy for lack of a better word. Cropping a bit off the bottom of #5 might help.

pemmett

I love #7. I played around with your first image in PS, before I saw #7 and got a similar crop. You could also right a portrait crop, it's kind of interesting.

Great photos

photogmomma

#4 or 5, but make sure you use the rule of thirds and push the church to the left or right. Those photos are stunning. While I enjoy the first three - the redos are nice - they just don't have the pop or interest of 4 & 5. I don't know which I like better, though. i would crop from the right in 4 to keep that tree as a major element - it's VERY nice - and I'd probably crop from the right in #5, too. The fence is too strong and almost overwhelms the rest of the photo, IMHO, and it's a phenomenal one.

Hope that helps! Good luck!

Nikolai

Ana,
#4, with enhanced skies and mayby less ground.
Great series otherwise.
So picturesque:-)

ChrisJ

I like the composition in #1, but the light just isn't there to back it up (as you already know ). Good light in #4 and #5, but the subject just doesn't grab me.

I know I've seen better from you, just keep waking up for those sunrises and I'm sure you'll get "lucky".

richtersl

I like #5 a lot. The light in that one is particularly nice. The grass in the foreground is rather boring, though. I would crop from the bottom so that the photo has dimensions similar to #1. This would also pull the eye up toward that wonderful sky in the photo.

For the landscape shots, try saturating your reds and yellows just a little to see if that adds a little more "pop" to them. And, if the color version doesn't work, try B&W.

seastack

ChrisJ wrote:

I like the composition in #1, but the light just isn't there to back it up (as you already know ). Good light in #4 and #5, but the subject just doesn't grab me.

I know I've seen better from you, just keep waking up for those sunrises and I'm sure you'll get "lucky".

I hate to say it but I agree. I do like the zoomed-in hilltop version better but it still isn't quite there. Play to your strengths, which are many!

annnna8888

LiquidAir wrote:

I am leaning toward #4 or #5. I like the well in the forground of #5, but the large area of grass in the foreground feels kind of heavy for lack of a better word. Cropping a bit off the bottom of #5 might help.

Thanks! I've been considering cropping the bottom off #5 and see if it grabs me more.

Ana

annnna8888

pemmett wrote:

I love #7. I played around with your first image in PS, before I saw #7 and got a similar crop. You could also right a portrait crop, it's kind of interesting.

Great photos

Thanks!
I'll play around with the photos some more and try different crops. I haven't tried a portrait crop yet, so thanks for the idea!

Ana

annnna8888

photogmomma wrote:

#4 or 5, but make sure you use the rule of thirds and push the church to the left or right. Those photos are stunning. While I enjoy the first three - the redos are nice - they just don't have the pop or interest of 4 & 5. I don't know which I like better, though. i would crop from the right in 4 to keep that tree as a major element - it's VERY nice - and I'd probably crop from the right in #5, too. The fence is too strong and almost overwhelms the rest of the photo, IMHO, and it's a phenomenal one.

Hope that helps! Good luck!

Thanks, Andi! Of course it helps. Other people's opinions can help you see your own photos in a new light, in a way that you never even thought about.

I agree about the pop. The thing is that predawn photos of mist can never be contrasty and full of color - and I was hoping that maybe a more subtle approach might work. But human eye is usually attracted to strong colors and contrast, so a subtle photo really needs to be extraordinary in order to appeal to the viewers. I'm still torn as to what to enter, but I do have a couple of days to either produce something new or sleep on the photos that I already have and then decide.

Thanks again and good luck to you too!

Ana

annnna8888

Nikolai wrote:

#4, with enhanced skies and mayby less ground.
Great series otherwise.
So picturesque:-)

Nik, thanks!
I've been telling people for a long time that Slovenia is a great destination for photographers.

Ana

annnna8888

ChrisJ wrote:

I like the composition in #1, but the light just isn't there to back it up (as you already know ). Good light in #4 and #5, but the subject just doesn't grab me.

I know I've seen better from you, just keep waking up for those sunrises and I'm sure you'll get "lucky".

Hehe, thanks. I wish I was more of a morning person. I hate getting up early, and I only do it for photography!

Ana

annnna8888

richtersl wrote:

I like #5 a lot. The light in that one is particularly nice. The grass in the foreground is rather boring, though. I would crop from the bottom so that the photo has dimensions similar to #1. This would also pull the eye up toward that wonderful sky in the photo.

For the landscape shots, try saturating your reds and yellows just a little to see if that adds a little more "pop" to them. And, if the color version doesn't work, try B&W.

Linda, thanks! Quite a few people have suggested the crop in #5, so I'll definitely try that.
As for the saturation, believe me, I did that to the extent I almost never do. But the air was just too misty to have any contrast in the photos at all. B&W is something I should maybe try - but I'm not a big fan.

Ana

annnna8888

seastack wrote:

I hate to say it but I agree. I do like the zoomed-in hilltop version better but it still isn't quite there. Play to your strengths, which are many!

Thanks, Tom! I would play to my strengths if only I had more time to go out and shoot some more photos and if only the weather cooperated!
I'll go through my photos again and see if something comes to me.

Ana

ivar

Hi Ana,

It may make things more complicated, but I actually like #1 best, and wouldn't want more 'pop'. I like the dreamy, fairytale look of the image. I think it would loose that with more pop.

#5 would be my second choice. Nice color, I like the wide angle effect. #4 is missing something compared to #5 I think.

LiquidAir

annnna8888 wrote:

Thanks, Andi! Of course it helps. Other people's opinions can help you see your own photos in a new light, in a way that you never even thought about.

I agree about the pop. The thing is that predawn photos of mist can never be contrasty and full of color - and I was hoping that maybe a more subtle approach might work. But human eye is usually attracted to strong colors and contrast, so a subtle photo really needs to be extraordinary in order to appeal to the viewers. I'm still torn as to what to enter, but I do have a couple of days to either produce something new or sleep on the photos that I already have and then decide.

Thanks again and good luck to you too!

Ana

I like misty shots. Sadly, they not so easy to find this time of year in California; things are pretty dry. The easiest way I know to make them work is to put something close enough in the forground to give that you get a true black point. That black point serves as a reference to anchor the shot so the rest of the scene can be as misty as you'd like.

Tessa HD

lps
I very quickly looked at your ideas and like #5 the best.

Tessa

davev

Hi Ana
I like #5 the best. I guess I just don't like looking down at the main subject of the photo, as in the chapel shots.

saurora

I like 5 the best. I reacted more strongly to it the second I saw it. The light is just that much sweeter in 5 than in 4. I like the unusual vantage point as well. Your other shots are not to be sneezed at. I think they would look particularly amazing in a large print.