Helpful Posts Helpful Posts:  0

View Poll Results: Does this shot work for you

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes - it works for me

    8 80.00%
  • Somewhat

    2 20.00%
  • No - not really

    0 0%
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    I'm in two minds about this shot - does it work?

    Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)
    Last edited by Colin Southern; 1st June 2009 at 09:29 AM.

  2. #2

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    It works for me...!
    I like this shot..

  3. #3
    Moderator Dave Humphries's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Windsor, Berks, UK
    Posts
    16,232
    Real Name
    Dave Humphries :)

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Hi Colin,

    Yes I think so, I spent a bit of time going between this and (I).

    I think both work, although see my post in (I) for more.

    Cheers,

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Coventry, UK
    Posts
    304

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    I much prefer this one.

  5. #5
    Moderator Donald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Glenfarg, Scotland
    Posts
    19,914
    Real Name
    Just add 'MacKenzie'

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Quote Originally Posted by crusty View Post
    I much prefer this one.
    I go the other way and prefer (I). Why?

    For me the organic matter on the water is too busy and distracts from what's behind. In (I) it does not have the same effect and attention is thrown towards the hills and the sunset, particularly the reflection. That reflection doesn't make the same impact in (II)... I think !

    I don't go near the technical aspects ... apart from just striving to get somewhere close to producing images like that.

    Donald

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    466

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    I like it, but I'd crop the bottom so that on the bottom right the plant matter or whatever it is is very skinny ....
    Last edited by Colin Southern; 1st June 2009 at 07:49 PM.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Coventry, UK
    Posts
    304

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Having read your thoughtsDonald, I understand what your saying, but I have to say I still prefer this one over the cropped version.
    I don't seem to find the organic matter distracting, my eye seems to go straight to the colours of the sunset and then I look around the rest of the scene.
    Maybe panoramic is more pleasing to my eye

  8. #8

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    I go with this version mainly because of what you said about printing to large format. I can see this working far better in a gallery style environment. The portrait version is still a stunning image but this scene begs landscape to me.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Thanks everyone.

    The "organic matter" is just wet mud by the way. This shot is probably what NASA would call a "successful failure"; this location requires high tide to do anything with, and as I drove by I saw that it WAS high-tide, so I pulled over and setup shop ...

    ... unfortunately, high-tide had just peaked, and as the sun set to a more ideal position, the water started retreating VERY quickly (the mud flats are very flat), and within minutes my primary composition was literally "high and dry". So I thought I'd try to make the best of a bad situation, and capture some of the light reflecting off the (still wet) mud.

    Just a case of "going throught the motions" and "hoping for the best". Just for the record, I shot it with a Singh-Ray 3-Stop reverse GND filter - not much PP with the exception of dust spot removel and tweaking of colours/saturation etc to taste.

    @ Kevin. Thanks for that Kevin. I agree that less distracting material at the bottom would be better - unfortunately, the more I crop off, the more it moves the horizon line down, and that breakes the rule of thirds (I'm pushing it already). Much as I love breaking rules like that, the result has to justify it - and I don't think that that would have worked in this case. I probably should have composed it a little differently.
    Last edited by Colin Southern; 1st June 2009 at 09:39 PM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Texas, USA
    Posts
    50

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Colin, I definitely like this better than the vertical. Not sure I could put why into words. Maybe I'm just enamored of the panorama landscapes.

    By the way, did you use a split ND filter on this shot?

    Thanks,
    Joe

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    17,662
    Real Name
    Have a guess :)

    Re: Goodnight Mount Arthur (II)

    Quote Originally Posted by joec View Post
    Colin, I definitely like this better than the vertical. Not sure I could put why into words. Maybe I'm just enamored of the panorama landscapes.

    By the way, did you use a split ND filter on this shot?

    Thanks,
    Joe
    Hi Joe,

    Thanks for that. Yes, I used a Singh-Ray 3-Stop hard edged Reverse GND.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •