I know the lighting is wonderful in this shot. It was technically above my ability to shoot it well. I'm left with the question is the lighting interesting enough to carry the shot past the dark and blown out sky, the dark background and the feeling of softness brought about by the haze and low light? It has been awhile since I have traversed the doorsteps of this forum and the expertise shown here is usually at a level that reminds me I need to take some classes. Having said that thoughts and suggestions on the compositional and technical aspects of this shot would be appreciated. Shot info. f11, iso 400, SS 1/250. Thanks for any comments in advance, feel free to play. Rick
My sense is it is too tall. Couldn't arrive at any crop I liked. Love the cloud churn at the top but then we lose the anchor for the image. Landscape orientation possible?
My only thought is to have had something shorter than 100mm mounted at the time and start from there.
Part of the issue @ the comp is the large mass of bright tonal value at the top and the small mass of bright tonal value at the bottom. With them so far apart, it is hard to "see" them both simultaneously ... or we "ping pong" a bit back and forth between the two. B&W, divide and conquer illustrates it a bit @ how we perceive the same thing a bit differently.
By cropping, we can divide and conquer, but we can also change the weighting of tonal values if we crop some of it away, to try and bring a little more "balance" between the bright tonal areas at opposite ends of the image.
Took a stab at it ... pretty noisy on my end, but you get the gist.
Bob and Keith, Thank you for the suggestions and the demonstrations, got me thinking, what about a crop of the middle and upper top part of the sky? Of course at this point it is not worth printing, but thanks for the thought provoking. Rick
With a deft hand to combine them it could work. It looks a little square-ish as is and could use some slimming maybe, but likely serves more as an exercise in tonal value distance/relationship @ food for thought.
I've thought of doing the same for other images (middle crop), but haven't found many strong enough to warrant the effort.
Rick, I think I preferred your first version. To me this image is all about the extent of the magical lighting. The rays and bottom portion of the image are not especially interesting as a crop.
BTW, I have encountered many times when the lighting was magical. Only rarely does the magic translate from reality through the camera to a final image. The lighting that appeared magical in person was often subtle, shimmering and alive. Most of those characteristics seem to be lost in arriving at a final image. I have also found that I can spend a lot of time trying to regain some of the magic through my processing. When I finally achieve something decent on my monitor, I can proceed with a print and find the subtle magic is again lost. Subtle lighting is really difficult to capture on a print. I often find myself making a lot of adjustments and proofs. It also all but essential to have a printer that uses multiple black and gray pigments. Good luck. I think your image can make a great, large print but I expect that will take a lot of work, trial and error.
Trash bin? No. Rick this is a beautiful image. Rustybug's #3 version with the crop and editing blends this whole image together cohesively.(to my eyes anyway) The cloud formation looks like a breaking wave cascading downward with the sun spilling it's beautiful rays down on the pastoral scene at the bottom of the frame. Looks like a piece of art.
