Thank you Minnie! Please see my reply to Mike; this was a trellis-style apple orchard with finishing touches added before the trees were planted. In fact, I think it's two separate "styles" of apparatus. I took the photo in 2015 and have not encountered a similar photo op since 🙂
Welcome home tinternaut, glad to have you join us again! A smile worthy image. The migraine may be from the experimental jazz or the paint design on the piano which makes me dizzy enough before you add the beer. The paint job provides the same kind of intense contrasts Roel offers in his wonderful circus image and that I remember from the last image you posted here. Intense contrasting tones create memorable photos whether the intensity is created by lighting or by paint. Here it's the paint that did it, and the photographer that saw it and figured out how to arrange it in a capture (longest line emerging from lower left corner, intersecting with other lines about 1/3 of the way into the scene. The human hand makes the subject clear, and along with the yellow coasters give us the color bump needed to sort it out from monochrome). Nicely caught.
Thanks for looking. No filters were used in the making of this image. The colors really were there. In the finest traditions of photography, though, I dodged and burned away some distracting foreground detail and "improved" the contrast and saturation "slightly." AA would approve.
You didn't catch the 3 dozen really noticeable dust bunnies I "cleaned up!" 😉
The fantastic atmospherics and colors in the American Desert Southwest sky sometimes are astonishing. It doesn't happen with every sunset or sunrise, but when it's good it can be jaw-dropping. I remember a 10 day span in Tucson when every sunset was like this or better. No two are alike and the intensity and saturation of the colors can be beyond belief. When you look at art, especially painted pottery from people indigenous to the area, it becomes very clear where the inspiration arose for the designs and color palette of their work.
Keep an eye on the thread, you'll likely get other ideas. Also, if you look at the other monochrome images in the thread and their comments, that may help too. Jim Kasson's two photos in this thread and the comments are good examples.
Thank you very much for your response and explanation - I really appreciate it, while at the same time (once more) asking myself, if I'm actually really THAT bad at getting my point across... It certainly sometimes seems that way.
It's the visual that didn't work for me, and a visual will always trump a concept or point. The halo didn't have the appearance of lighting the flower, it looked like an extra element floating untethered above. I find I often feel that way about light painting. (I feel the same way about star trails). But viewers' reactions will differ so what bothers one may appeal to another. Don't ever be disheartened because a few people don't respond to an image if the majority do. That's very normal even with a really good image. But if 60-70% have a weak response, it may mean you should rethink it and figure out why. I have used this metric to let forums "help" me choose images for competitions and gallery displays, and it has served me well so far.
G'Day Tinternaut.
This is a striking image with four different but clearly established elements. The finger pointing at the beer emphatically insists that either a point is being made or that we should interpret something from the image. Here goes.
The painted piano has bold stripes of different lengths running in different directions. any energy. The sign offers an explanation. The sign and hand are associated through similar colours. so the pointing finger can be seen as offering an explanation or additional information to the sign. the finger suggests that beer is the answer.
A photo with a lighthearted message.
Visually the card, hand and beeremerge together from the background . They form a stable triangle that lock together against the chaos of the background. The hand looks a little artificial. It may have been added in PP. It doesn't matter. The image isn't about realism.
Thanks for stopping by and the critique both you and PeteS...
Much appreciated ….. It was a series and not sure if it will continue .. All four were based on a single PP four layer group that I modified slightly between the four … All four used the same compositional device – the leading line down the middle and out to not much of interest … This is what I've tried unsuccessfully to engage a conversation about in the past – piers that leave me jumping off into the water as no Jenifer standing at the end and tree lines leaving me lost in the forest …..... With these four there was no Jenifer, hopefully the other elements of the picture were seen and of interest along the path as you follow the line and maybe stopped at a train or store …. Maybe even generated a story but then ….
WhyNot
BTW I wasn't convinced about those blacked out headlights either and version 1 did not include them ..... and there may be others I haven't specifically replied to and I'm sorry and hope not to miss you in the future ...
Your image in itself makes us look and think twice.
Green trees presented as pink candyfloss.
This is a way of processing an image that distorts reality and makes it sur-real.
I like being challenged and provoked, so that image of yours ticks a few boxes for me.
But most of all, it brought back an incredibly haunting memory.
A few years ago (2014) , the Antwerp Photo Museum hosted an installation by photographer and visual artist Richard Mosse, under the title "INFRA".
This exhibition consisted of two parts :
On the one hand : large photo prints.
On the other: a visual installation in a darkened space, with multiple screens on which fragments of video were projected, sometimes in harmony, sometimes extending the image over more than one screen, sometimes different points-of-view of the same scene, sometimes brutal juxtapositions.
All of that imagery was shot with a large medium format camera and a specific kind of film emulsion that turns greens into pinks.
I think it was called Aerochrome.
The specific kind of film originated in war times and had been used for military purposes, i.e. to spot humans and equipment through camouflage.
Richard Mosse bought a stock of that film and used it to photography and film a conflict zone in Central Africa, with images of troop movements, checkpoints, soldiers posing, but also a huge refugee camp. I think he must have used techniques to mimic the same effect also in his video footage.
To see all of that in bright candy-colours was totally disorienting and ... yes, haunting.
Here is an image I made there (not in the video installation; that was too intense):
!
I was quite simply blown away. I have never forgotten that experience.
More recently, he has made new work about environmental catastrophe in the amazon region, using similar techniques, including infrared and thermal imagery.
His philosophy is that climate change is a "hidden catastrophe" because it is something that the camera cannot see (in real time)
What the camera cannot see is a short enough video about his work in different chapters, including images of the installation "INFRA"
(it really is a MUST see):
It is enchanted and you must visit it often. What I like: the almost hidden bird peeking at us from her well-disguised position. And the gorgeous blue bokeh in the background. And the gentle forest colors in the background and around the edges. What I struggle with: the seemingly blown out vine as it curls towards us. It just draws my eye away and dominates the otherwise subtle and lovely image.
If this is a raw file you might be able to find some extra detail to work with. If not, there is a dilemma of what else you might do which would range from removal/replacement to transplanting detail from the less exposed portion, to transforming the whole thing to a more fantasy type image. This is where some really advanced editing might come to the rescue. It's something I might try to do just for the challenge of it. I'm trying to master such things, but still on the journey.