Immovable

[chiangkxv]

Immovable​

It has been quite sometime since I last posted here, here is a shot which I have a love/hate relationship. Hope fellow bros can give me some comments and critique. Thank you in advance.

1. in what area is critique to be sought?
Composition and choice of cropping

2. what one hopes to achieve with the piece of work?
To show how everything else move except the mountain.

3. under what circumstance is the picture taken? (physical conditions/emotions)
Shot minutes after sun has set, with approaching storm.

4. what the critique seeker personally thinks of the picture
I like how movement of nature (clouds and river) is captured. But I feel that there may be too much space on the top.

 

[foxtwo]

It's fine as it is. Might have slight issues with space on L & R, top & bottom but does not break the photograph.

Can't see very well on my phone, are there much detail of the island?

Edit : there's detail but the flaring at the peak is a bit distracting.

 

[chiangkxv]

It's fine as it is. Might have slight issues with space on L & R, top & bottom but does not break the photograph.

Can't see very well on my phone, are there much detail of the island?

Edit : there's detail but the flaring at the peak is a bit distracting.

Thank you for the C&C. I appreciate that. Yea there's detail, but not very much of it.

Sorry, but I don't get the flaring part. mind to elaborate?

 

[foxtwo]

centre of the mountain mass, there's something like a haze over it. I don't think it's pollution so may be caused by the long exposure.

is the sun set behind the mountain? it would look okay if the sun was visibly behind the mountain but since we can't see the sun, I'd prefer if the flaring was reduced.

it may be my monitor but this is a very low contrast image. I do like the warmth but b&w might be better looking as the island doesn't have much interesting features and very little detail in the sky as well.

 

[chiangkxv]

centre of the mountain mass, there's something like a haze over it. I don't think it's pollution so may be caused by the long exposure.

is the sun set behind the mountain? it would look okay if the sun was visibly behind the mountain but since we can't see the sun, I'd prefer if the flaring was reduced.

it may be my monitor but this is a very low contrast image. I do like the warmth but b&w might be better looking as the island doesn't have much interesting features and very little detail in the sky as well.

Oh I got it. It is perhaps the brighter part of the sky, behind the mass of cloud.

Yea, I do like the warm colour too, thus keeping it it colour. You may be right, converting it to B&W might work better. Thank you for you enlightening comment.

Cheers.

 

[The Moving Chair]

Personally, I don't quite like the framing and orientation. Did you shoot this in portrait orientation then cropped off some parts? Granted, you want to show that the sky is moving, but because the land and the mountain takes a small horizontal strip in the frame, it makes the overall composition look rather unbalanced.

There are many ways to show movement, other than panning, stars move across the night sky as well. I thought that to show one thing move and the other doesn't, your choice of portrayal doesnt quite show this as strongly as it should. Without your description, I couldnt quite appreciate what the mountain and the sky is supposed to portray.

 

[chiangkxv]

Personally, I don't quite like the framing and orientation. Did you shoot this in portrait orientation then cropped off some parts? Granted, you want to show that the sky is moving, but because the land and the mountain takes a small horizontal strip in the frame, it makes the overall composition look rather unbalanced.

There are many ways to show movement, other than panning, stars move across the night sky as well. I thought that to show one thing move and the other doesn't, your choice of portrayal doesnt quite show this as strongly as it should. Without your description, I couldnt quite appreciate what the mountain and the sky is supposed to portray.

Hi Lawrence,

Thank you for your C&C.

As for the reason why I chose to frame the picture this way, Since the bottom part of the picture is rather empty, showing too much of it will result in alot of dead space. Thus I have decided to forgo the third rule to place the hill slightly below the third. But I have to agree with you that the subject is not as strong as I wanted it to be.

 

[edutilos-]

I usually do not read explanations unless I don't find anything meaningful in the picture. If the title is not suitable then the solution for me is simple - photographer needs to reassess the title, and perhaps get his concept firmer or be realistic as to how much can be conveyed in the photograph that is in his mind. So explanations and title aside, I think this is fine. My only issues are that the photograph feels a bit too tight, and the toning is not so aesthetically pleasing. I suspect this would work better as a BnW photograph.

 

[chiangkxv]

I usually do not read explanations unless I don't find anything meaningful in the picture. If the title is not suitable then the solution for me is simple - photographer needs to reassess the title, and perhaps get his concept firmer or be realistic as to how much can be conveyed in the photograph that is in his mind. So explanations and title aside, I think this is fine. My only issues are that the photograph feels a bit too tight, and the toning is not so aesthetically pleasing. I suspect this would work better as a BnW photograph.

Hi Edutilos, Thank you for your C&C.

Ahhhh. I see. I need a better title.

Would like to clarify on 2 matter.
1. Do you mean the photo needs more space to the left and right
2. The photo Lacks contrast or the warm hue doesn't work well?

I'll pp a B&W version and see how it goes.

Once again, thank you for dropping by.
Cheers.

 

[edutilos-]

Would like to clarify on 2 matter.
1. Do you mean the photo needs more space to the left and right
2. The photo Lacks contrast or the warm hue doesn't work well?

1. Yes. But only if the sides aren't too mountainous either.
2. The whole color palette just looks dirty, and not pleasing to the eye. This issue is also something that seems to pop up in your Taiwan stream in Landscapes/Travel somehow... The palette tends to be a little off-kilter for me.

 

[chiangkxv]

1. Yes. But only if the sides aren't too mountainous either.
2. The whole color palette just looks dirty, and not pleasing to the eye. This issue is also something that seems to pop up in your Taiwan stream in Landscapes/Travel somehow... The palette tends to be a little off-kilter for me.

I see.. I'll relook into my pp process to see what has gone wrong.

Thank you for highlighting things that I cannot fail to see.

 

[chiangkxv]

Immovable B&W​

Is this a better attempt?

 

[foxtwo]

needs a pure white / white with little detail. Looks grey on my screen.

 

[coolthought]

Is this a better attempt?

it look like there are noticeable lost in detail when you converted it into bnw.

 

[yongmeng81]

i would have taken the picture in a warm colour and made the whole mountain look black. as like a silhouette to the nice warm sky behind. eh ya..tts my beginner thoughts.

I may also then change the title to: I shall not be move!

Cheers! i like ur pic anyway..nice!

 

[chiangkxv]

needs a pure white / white with little detail. Looks grey on my screen.

Perhaps so. But I prefer to keep the details of the sky. This picture is quite flat, and thus the contrasty sky may help.

 

[chiangkxv]

it look like there are noticeable lost in detail when you converted it into bnw.

Seems like I have made it worst.

Do you mean the sky or the mountain? I did unsharpen the sky by abit.

 

[chiangkxv]

i would have taken the picture in a warm colour and made the whole mountain look black. as like a silhouette to the nice warm sky behind. eh ya..tts my beginner thoughts.

I may also then change the title to: I shall not be move!

Cheers! i like ur pic anyway..nice!

That may work too, thank you for your suggestion. cheers