tree in a funk, or, funk-ee tr-ee-

System

JenGrace

Wow, very surreal...like it's out of your dreams.

NeilL

Mmmm... interesting, George. Very interesting. Compositionally, I like it a lot. I would nearly display it in the house. Just that what it is a picture of I don't find much compelling, and the very good compositional elements it contains neither much compelling. Surface is beautiful.

System

JenW wrote:

Wow, very surreal...like it's out of your dreams.

thanks jen-

re dreams-

it 'tis!-

'it's not what you see, it's what you feel'-

System

NeilL wrote:

Mmmm... interesting, George. Very interesting. Compositionally, I like it a lot. I would nearly display it in the house. Just that what it is a picture of I don't find much compelling, and the very good compositional elements it contains neither much compelling. Surface is beautiful.

thanks neil!-

just for the heck of it, I'm going to post a copy of the original raw file-


ps subject is definitely more of a personal interest-

this is a part of cherokee lake which has been drawn down quite a bit due to drought-

and always this way in winter-

just a part of the scenery of the area I so dearly love-

System

copy of raw file, warts and all-

Arvan

I would prefer the original raw.

Nice lightning and that wideangle distorsion is just superb.

sherstone

Awesome stuff George - I really like the treatment you gave it.
What I like the most is how the texture in the foreground curves towards you.

HNY btw.

System

sherstone wrote:

Awesome stuff George - I really like the treatment you gave it.
What I like the most is how the texture in the foreground curves towards you.

HNY btw.

thanks much sean-

NeilL

Thanks for the RAW, George. It helps a lot to interpret what is a very intriguing shot. I love the RAW, but I also think you have added something very nice and different in your version of it. A problem with the version is that distance cues are weakened, so that the tree looks closer than it really is and so smaller and less assertive. The whole image suffers from less impact, a loss which is aggravated by the cropping of the very beautiful miniature waterscape mid right.

I don't see how you can go further with this particular take. I think you could profit greatly from a revisit. Once again I offer the same ol' advice of finding the abstract (compositional elements) in the viewinder. Your version here finds such elements post take, which is quite legitimate, but unfortunately in this case at some cost, as I have described.

System

NeilL wrote:

Thanks for the RAW, George. It helps a lot to interpret what is a very intriguing shot. I love the RAW, but I also think you have added something very nice and different in your version of it. A problem with the version is that distance cues are weakened, so that the tree looks closer than it really is and so smaller and less assertive. The whole image suffers from less impact, a loss which is aggravated by the cropping of the very beautiful miniature waterscape mid right.

I don't see how you can go further with this particular take. I think you could profit greatly from a revisit. Once again I offer the same ol' advice of finding the abstract (compositional elements) in the viewinder. Your version here finds such elements post take, which is quite legitimate, but unfortunately in this case at some cost, as I have described.

thanks much neil-

being that it's just a couple miles from me, I might give it a shot-