Catcott Lows Somerset

bwlchmawr
Posted 19/02/2010 - 17:32 Link
Taken a couple of weeks ago on a sunny morning. I was a bit frustrated at not being able to get to the water's edge so took this instead. Looked quite good on the screen when levelled and sharpened yesterday. It was almost monochrome anyway so I did a simple conversion. Opinions, suggestions for improvement, as ever, gratefully sought.
[IMG]http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad116/ADC3440/Pictures1047a.jpg[/IMG]
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference.  All of them can record what you are seeing.  But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Anvh
Posted 19/02/2010 - 19:40 Link
It's a hard photo to like for me, I really like the reflection of the clouds in the water but I find the trees in the foreground good but the branches are too busy and to pronounce. I think it would have looked better without the trees for that reason.

No suggestions for improvement for this shot or you want to try to clone out the trees but that surely can not be your intention.

Is there maybe more details in the trees that you can bring out?
Don't know if that would improve the photo though but interesting to try out.
Stefan
Comment Image

K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
thoughton
Posted 19/02/2010 - 20:02 Link
I quite like it. It's a great BW conversion, and the dramatic clouds hiding beyond the branches draws a second closer look. However I'm not sure if I'd like it more with or without the trees! I think it may have been more striking with beefier trees with bigger main branches.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
FlickrFluidrPPGStreetPortfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
bwlchmawr
Posted 19/02/2010 - 20:30 Link
Thanks for your comments, gents. I can see what you both mean about the trees. Sadly there was no way through to exclude them and there were no bigger ones (nature of the wetlands, mainly stunted willows or alder). There's no way I can bring out any detail in the trees: I exposed for the very bright sky, knowing the trunks would be virtual silhouettes. I'm not mad about the picture, I just think it's quite unusual and interesting with the thin twiggy branches partially screenuing the sky and reflection. I mean, I don't think, as a landscape, that it's derivative...

Regards and thanks for your kind attention,

Andrew
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference.  All of them can record what you are seeing.  But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050
http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Steveninwyoming
Posted 20/02/2010 - 22:54 Link
Think of it this way, Do you enjoy looking at it? Did you have fun when you captured the image? If you did, it doesn't matter what others think.
Anyway, that's just my opinion.

Steven

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo