Taking on Water

[C J Southern]

I think it was Manfred who said over a decade ago something along the lines of "one can always tell one of my images" (from the "style"); I guess this is one of those images.

My style has changed a bit over the years, but I'm still drawn to burnt orange sunsets, silhouettes, strong colours, water effects, with strong contrast & sharpening, and fairly classical composition; all very much the case here.

I always like to give a somewhat cryptic title to my images; in this case the "taking on water" didn't refer to the yacht ... just the photographer (not literally taking on water - just "taking on the challenge of photographing water").

I added a bit of noise to the water and gave it a different sharpening treatment to "get it where I wanted it" so that it was as strong a part of the image as the other more obvious components.

[DanK]

Nice image. I think I would remove the buoy lights, but that's just my taste.

[Geoff F]

I suspect this is one of those images where everyone will have slightly different tastes. For instance, I would leave the navigation lights but crop the right side to give a 3 x 2 ratio.

[C J Southern]

Nice image. I think I would remove the buoy lights, but that's just my taste.

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the comment. I think removing them would make the image look quite "minimalist".

[C J Southern]

I suspect this is one of those images where everyone will have slightly different tastes. For instance, I would leave the navigation lights but crop the right side to give a 3 x 2 ratio.

Hi Geoff,

Thanks for your comment. I learned a long time ago that the bigger canvas prints are, the more impact they have - but my printer is limited to around 600mm media (along the short edge) - and about 100mm in total of that is "null and void" because it's either wrapped around the edges or used for stapling on the back.

So I got into the habit early of printing images in a 2:1 aspect ratio (sometimes 3:1 and occasionally 4:1) so that they're bigger. I also think it's closer to the aspect ration of human vision when using both eyes.

[DanK]

If I remember right, years ago, there was some interesting debate on this forum about aspect ratios.

Re this specific issue: if it were mine, I would leave it long, but I probably would crop a very small amount from the right--probably around the right-most valley. My reason would be just to avoid having the viewer's eye drawn too much away from the subject.

Personally, I never use fixed aspect ratios for serious images unless I have to--for example, if a display requires it. I allow the image to determine what should be cropped or left, and that leads to idiosyncratic aspect ratios. For example, this one has an aspect ratio of 1.43:1, determined by creating a pleasing amount of negative space around the plants:




This one is 1.78:1, to avoid distracting, irrelevant detail:



The cost of this, which was driven home to me recently when we moved to a smaller home, is that one collects a lot of expensive frames that later go unused. I deal with that sometimes by finding a frame that is approximately right and cutting a mat that has different side and top dimensions.

[C J Southern]

if it were mine, I would leave it long, but I probably would crop a very small amount from the right--probably around the right-most valley. My reason would be just to avoid having the viewer's eye drawn too much away from the subject.

I completely understand what you mean; it works well for your artistic choices. For mine though, the boat isn't the subject as such; it's not intended to be "a boat in a scenic setting" as it is a "scenic setting with the boat just adding to that to make it more visually pleasing". ie "it adds to the image", but "isn't the star of the show".

Personally, I never use fixed aspect ratios for serious images unless I have to--for example, if a display requires it. I allow the image to determine what should be cropped or left, and that leads to idiosyncratic aspect ratios. For example, this one has an aspect ratio of 1.43:1, determined by creating a pleasing amount of negative space around the plants:

This one is 1.78:1, to avoid distracting, irrelevant detail:

The cost of this, which was driven home to me recently when we moved to a smaller home, is that one collects a lot of expensive frames that later go unused. I deal with that sometimes by finding a frame that is approximately right and cutting a mat that has different side and top dimensions.

Yep; that's mostly why 22 x 44" was a standard canvas size for me; the jigs for frames were geared around it - the frames were geared around it - the plywood "coffin's" were standardised for shipping the finished products etc.

Personally, I just think it's one of those "no right or wrong" things - just personal choice. For me, the autistic traits in my brain like to create uniformity; only breaking out of the mold when something warranted it eg:



or: