Ethereal and highly detailed. I like it, and I suspect this would work well as a very large print. Not going too high on contrast preserves details in the trunks - part of the reason I'd like to see a larger version. Overall, I'd say low contrast (though this isn't that low) is a good move.
You made my day, Lex. Those are the two most important impressions that I want the photo to convey. The term, "ethereal," is even a better description than I had in mind, as I was struggling in my mind for the right word. Thanks to you, I'm no longer struggling for it.
Rather like it,it breaks a lot of 'rules'a neat image altogether,even a bird's nest would have spoilt it
A beauty, Mike. Lex called it right.
You've done a superb job on sharpening. Could easily have gone too far.
I probably would have walked past it grumbling about not seeing anything worth photographing.
My lesson for the day. Thanks!
Tony
Thanks, everyone!
Donald mentioned that it's not overly sharpened. Actually, if you review the photo in the Lytebox's largest version, you might agree with me that I was a bit heavy handed. My RAW file isn't quite as sharp and I like it better. All of the photos that I post here are downsized and sharpened as part of a batch process. That almost always works fine but in this case the sharpening is just a little bit too much; a custom sharpening would be more to my liking.
For the record, when I get excited about a photo and my wife is not so convinced, she invariably and very politely calls it "interesting." That's her code word for not to her liking. When she saw this photo, she immediately and emphatically said, "That's not a good photo," and then walked away.![]()
Last edited by Mike Buckley; 18th April 2013 at 10:19 PM.
Nice. I think you should experiment with thick black image borders.
Karm
I can't tell you how gratifying it is to see this, Mike, as it fits right in with my aesthetic. I like it as is, but I also like it cropped in from the top to the point that the branches are filling in the upper right hand corner.
Interesting, very interesting Mike.No Mike, not for me, the B&W is something I can learn from.
Not an original Mike Buckley though.![]()
Continued thanks to everyone! I'm actually a bit surprised that this appeals to so many people. It's good to know that not every monochrome image has to have rich, saturated blacks.
Janis: Thanks for the idea of your crop. I tried it as well as others and couldn't find one that made sense of the empty space for me. That might be because I saw the empty areas of this version to be such integral parts of the image from the very beginning that I'm not yet able to fully appreciate other alternatives.
Hi Mike,
This works for me too - and I am one of those that normally always wants a true black in the picture - however, since it is distant and being viewed against the sky, that isn't how one would see it, so it is 'right' - if you know what I mean.
I hadn't thought of it that way, Dave. Now that you mention it, that makes sense.