Composition and simplicity?Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
10 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Composition and simplicity?What's wrong with a little complexity? Does this image work for you? Or is it too fussy?
Regards
Matt. K
Re: Composition and simplicity?Not sure if better contrasting light would help with such a busy image. To me it seems rather flat at the moment which does not give the subject enough separation from the background nor does it show off the finer detail in the branches, leaves and flowers. It might work better as a large print where the detail is easier for the viewer to see and examine.
I have a forest shot with similar complexity that I am not sure works either. Craig
Lifes journey is not to arrive at our grave in a well preserved body but, rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "Wow what a ride." D70s, D300, 70-300ED, 18-70 Kit Lens, Nikkor 105 Micro. Manfrotto 190Prob Ball head. SB800 x 2.
Re: Composition and simplicity?Not for me sorry Matt - the tree itself is nice enough with a nice shape - perhaps if it was transplanted into a lone field or on top of a small hill or something?
D600, D7000, Nikon/Sigma/Tamron Lenses, Nikon Flashes, Sirui/Manfrotto/Benro Sticks
Rodney - My Photo Blog Want: Fast Wide (14|20|24)
Re: Composition and simplicity?Looks like a beautifully printed silver-gelatin print from a perfectly exposed neg. You nailed this one.
Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
Re: Composition and simplicity?
pretty much what he said. i cant really tell if it works either cos the lack of any contrast is quite distracting for me. it looks a bit mushy. EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75 l AW1 l V3
Re: Composition and simplicity?It’s a tree
Chris
-------------------------------- I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
Re: Composition and simplicity?I think it needs more contrast if you want
it to work in B&W, but somehow I suspect that colour is a better choice.
Re: Composition and simplicity?
dammit..that was my line. gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
Re: Composition and simplicity?I think you need a tad bit more separation between the tree and the background...even if the aim was to show the blending. This image is very flat in tone....but has so much potential to express the textures of the layers of leaves.
Cameron
Nikon F/Nikon 1 | Hasselblad V/XPAN| Leica M/LTM |Sony α/FE/E/Maxxum/M42 Wishlist Nikkor 24/85 f/1.4| Fuji Natura Black Scout-Images | Flickr | 365Project
Re: Composition and simplicity?mmm... personally I think there is nothing wrong with complex. fussy and low contrast... the image works fine for what it is and what you planned it to be.
We become too attached to the same game plan for images... like a recipe that we MUST always follow for an image to be 'correct'. I see it time and time again... if it's black and white it must have high contrast... if it is a portrait it must be sharp. All that aside this is probably not an image I would visit often, but that's more to do with its subject matter not having great interest to me rather than any technical fault. I'll go back to sleep now... Photography is not a crime, but perhaps my abuse of artistic license is?
Previous topic • Next topic
10 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|