Sandstone Wall and Moon

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Nature Photography Image Critique : One Thread



-- Chris Walter (walter@budoe.bu.edu), September 03, 1998

Answers

I have to admit that this abstract shot is hard to critique! Although technically flawless and interesting, however, it lacks some artistic soal and is too rigid for my taste. As is, the sky and the wall are not in harmony. At the first glance, my eyes were looking to see more of the sky. In this image, the sky adds color and the wall adds texture. I would have loved to see the tip of the ridge to be in the bottom 1/3 with its edge parallel to the bottom so that you have more of the sky would show. I think you have captured the sky beautifully and even without the moon it would still be interesting. As is, unless you mention it, many of the viewers like myself will simply overlook it. PS: The border is too black and too thick and in my opinion it takes away from the impact of this image. Thanks for the challange! Good luck.

-- Bahman Farzad (cpgbooks@mindspring.com), September 03, 1998.

Very unique sandstone formation. I find that the sky with its clouds, and especially the moon take away from the picture. Like Bahman I find the combination of sky and stone wall unharmonious. Somehow the two don't fit together. Nevertheless a very interesting picture. Glad you "captured" it.

-- (andreas@physio.unr.edu), September 04, 1998.

I love this photo. I'm always looking for objects that challenge accepted notions of what things look like. Here the earth laid down some colored layers of sand, twisted and contorted them and unfolded them in an unusual manner. The photo reflects this tortuous process. The small section of sky emphasizes the main subject. The moon to me represents the mystery of the photo. Maybe I'm reading too much into this photo but it works for me.

-- Warren Kato (wkato@aol.com), September 04, 1998.

I like it, but the color is a little too blue and the contrast is a little too flat. Now that I have seen the benefits of pushing slide film in such situations, I may never again be able to uncritically accept such low contrast/flat results.

-- Lester LaForce (102140.1200@compuserve.com), September 04, 1998.

I don't know how someone could call this photo flat and of low contrast. In my estimation the whole photo is about contrast. If the definition of art is that it must cause a reaction in the viewer, then this is art to me as I certainly had a strong initial reaction to this photo. My first reaction was one of revulsion. I think it is hideous.

-- bill wilson (wilson.w@worldnet.att.net), September 04, 1998.


The solution is simple. Crop off the sky. Then you have a wonderful abstract. In fact there are many abstracts here. Very nice. Only improvement, a warming filter.

-- Paul Lenson (lenson@pci.on.ca), September 04, 1998.

This picture looks unreal to me. It looks like a composition made in a 3D landscape program. I'm not saying that it is, but as a computer graphics geek that's my first impression. I would like to here the story of the shot from the photographer. What about it Chris?

-- Mike Green (mgprod@mindspring.com), September 04, 1998.

Hi,

Thanks for the constructive criticism so far. Well to the last posters question this picture is definitely not computer composition. I took this picture almost 10 years ago(wow..) while in College at the University of California at Santa Cruz. I was taking a photography workshop and the picture is taken north of Santa Cruz on a beach close to Ano Nuevo Island(where the elephant seals hang out).

The picture was taken with my Canon AE1 with a 50 mm lens using Kodachrome 25. I spent a lot of time setting the picture up on a tripod in order to try to get the horizon straight and fit the moon into the shot. It was about 1 hour before sunset as I recall and the late afternoon light was quite amazing.

I thought this was one of the best pictures I have taken but I think I will rethink that now after seeing some of the comments here. One thing that is true is that the slide looks better. The sky is less blue and there is a warmer feeling on the rock along with more subtle shading. This is my first experience with photoCD. I followed Phillip Greenspun's recommendations and did an autolevel on the colors(using the GIMP photo program) but I see now that for this picture the effect might have been to wash out some of the color in the rock and make the sky a little more blue.

-Chris

-- Chris Walter (walter@budoe.bu.edu), September 04, 1998.


I think this is a good photograph, and it really is hideous. That's not a contradiction, IMO.

-- Philipp Leibfried (phil@provi.de), September 07, 1998.

For six days, I have found myself continually returning to this image. The textures, shadows, and shadings of color maintain interest, not to mention the fact that this is a terrific geologic formation! I agree with the post regarding the border; perhaps a narrower frame would enhance the composition even more. Aside from my bias as a "rock hound," I have found this image to be one of the more interesting and intriguing that I have seen in recent postings. Imaginiatively done!

-- Sandy Quandt (sandyquandt@centuryinter.net), September 08, 1998.


Upside down it looks like a leopard springing on a meal in a chinese scroll. I think that a lighter sky would detract from this image though I would have cropped out the sky anyway. The detail in the rock is all I would want in this shot. The sky and moon have nothing to do with anything. I've never seen a Weston with a sky in a shot like this . Not that anyone should emulate anyone else. I can see my e-box filling up now.

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), October 01, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ