ok no problem. That is an opinion but what if someone came along tomorrow and completely removed the stump. I don't see the photo showing nature in exquisite perfection because I don't see any animals of any kind in the scene.
If the stump was removed tomorrow, imo the same scene would still be just as worthy to photograph without the stump being there.
Just my 2c worth.
No problem minniev. I wouldn't dream of removing your Bob Ross snag if you like it. I wasn't sure what the "worrisome distraction" you referred to was. Since the stump was a distracting eye-magnet for me I thought that might have been what you referred to and so removed it.
Interesting. In my previous comment on the moon shot I almost added that I thought it had been run through Topaz so I'm not suprised to see that it is something you use. I "Topaz" regularly although I don't always like what it does. The results are often mixed with great sections and not so great sections on the same Topaz image. On your original, I didn't think "Topaz" until I looked at the largest version I could see. Looking at it big, many of the edges appear as over enhanced bright lines. The same happens with plenty of my shots. I've started to experiment more with dialing back the sharpness level. The ability to control many different aspects of the AI process is a big plus for Topaz however I'm a long way from mastering it.
And yeah Dan, I know I don't use Quote correctly, I'll get around to it. I hate the flat view forum structure.
Some forums give members the option to list posts beginning at the last post and then the previous posts. Unfortunately this one doesn't.
What works well for me, especially in long threads, is to first go to the last post and then read the posts back from there.
This minimises the chance of reposting something that has already been mentioned.
Wow, thank you. I greatly appreciate that.
Thanks, Mike. You have read my intent quite correctly. The snag was deliberately included as a counterpoint to the starburst effect of the rest of the composition. Imperfections, when created by nature, appeal to me. When I first started in nature photography I sought out landscapes without intrusions, flowers in their perfect prime. I waited impatiently for all humans to get out of a scene. Now I look for interesting intrusions, while I still feel free to get rid of those I find bothersome like the fence in this one, loose trash, etc.
What about lightening the shadows a bit and cropping to a panoramic view?
Just some more food for thought 😊
OK. I'm convinced by Dan's alterations as well. The message remains the same while the alterations further reinforce what I feel is the message. I still see the result as a a dip of the lid to the principles of triangulation and construction. The lighter foreground increases the visual connection with the forms of the background buildings and the cranes. The horizontal lines of the cranes are important in feeling some of the stresses those apparently fragile structures manage. The wider crop accentuates the horizontal line of the cranes.
Thanks minnie.
On another forum the above and last week's image attracted a comment that they were over exposed. I had already realised that these birds have quite reflective feathers with a lot of specular highlights and had been dialing in a fair bit of -ve EC and reducing highlights where necessary. So I never thought of actually raising anything in this week's... This is about as far as I am prepared to go - I hope it's enough.
I have tried that. It works to some extent. It's why I delay posting much for the first few days of the week. Life is so much simpler when all the comments develop beneath the one image. It's the critical difference between what we try to do where the whole conversation with a mix of views is valued and everyone builds on the input of others as compared to forums where the discussion is mainly between the OP and an individual response.
Personally I would go with something like this. With this version I can see a hint of the bird's eyes on my screen.
We all find our own path in how we approach viewing the posted photos and sharing our impressions.
Whether in flat view or threaded (and I like threaded view SO much better), I tend to respond directly to the initial post. I try to avoid reading others' comments till after I've responded so I don't let them influence my view. Sometimes I accidentally stumble onto a comment or an edit before I've posted my own reaction, because of how this forum is constructed, but my intent is to respond without any influence other than the photo itself. If I later find a comment or edit that changes my impression, I can always add a response later down the line. But there are many different ways to approach this and none of them are wrong as long as we stick to clear, honest, civil responses.
Threaded view would certainly make it easier to follow expanded discussions and avoid misplaced quotes and other formatting issues.
Quite a landscape with many elements. The sunlit peaks, valleys and green grass offset the brooding clouds, their shadows and approaching storm, with the old tree sitting on that side of the fence...
I second same thoughts on the subject and lament the lack of threaded view, which hugely would improve the communication among the participants. Some time this year, I reckon...
I'm confused. I don't know who said what I struck out above but it wasn't me.
I knew you would have included more if you could have. What I would have loved to see is the full triangular roof / wall sections and the blue / grey panels under the windows... I think in this case a little bit of palm tree is better than none.
It's not the calibration of my monitor. It's the level of background blur. Neither diffuse from enough separation nor close enough to focused to remain comfortable.
Ok, but I can't edit photos to suit people's individual eye sight.
