The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
We pulled our canoe onto shore and started setting up camp as the late afternoon sun was easing its way down towards the horizon. As afternoon was edging into evening, I hastily began pitching our tent. But even in the midst of setting up, something drew me to look up to see this scene just below me where the campsite clearing dropped off into forest. As much as I needed to get the tent up, I couldn’t resist the dappled light that gave this little grouping of tree and stump the feel of an abstract light painting. I resisted … for about 30 seconds, and then grabbed my camera and tripod to see if I could make a picture of it before the light was gone. I’m pleased with the result. It certainly captures the abstract mood and complex play of light and shadow, which is what compelled me to make the picture in the first place.
It’s interesting how these things work out. I almost didn’t bother making this picture at the time because I knew we’d be staying at this same campsite over the next five nights, and I reckoned I’d have plenty of chances in the coming days to make this picture and not be rushed. But in fact, even though the weather stayed more or less the same, I never did get this light in quite the same way again
Specific Feedback
Chiaroscuro is probably my favourite technique for creating mood. Not surprisingly, Rembrandt and Vermeer are among my favourite painters. In the past, when out with my camera, I’ve favoured filtered light for its subtlety but recently I’ve begun to appreciate the possibilities that more high contrast, dappled light has to offer. Obviously, this is not a “story” picture but one that focuses exclusively on mood through the contrasting relationship between light and shadow. As always, I would be interested to hear your impressions and what the picture evokes in you.
Hi Kerry, A fascinating image you have shared with us. At it’s core of course is your continuing game of hide and seek with the light, teasing us with what could lurk in the shadows, this is well seen. But I’m puzzled by it’s softness (for being shot at f8) and I can’t quite find what your focus point was. I’m also curious about your choice of iso 800 for an image shot on the tripod. Did you run a denoise pass on the image that might have hurt the edge sharpness?
Kerry: I like this a lot and especially appreciate the story. I too love to work with the challenges of dappled light and often get the opportunity in our garden. I’ve learned that when the light is fleeting I need to drop everything and capture the moment. I’ve rarely been disappointed. Well seen and superbly composed, captured and presented. >=))>
@guy - Thanks for taking the time to look and comment, always appreciated. To answer your questions: First, let me share how I go about setting up my camera for a shot. I’m still hanging in with my Fujifilm X-T3. I love the analogue set-up where I very rarely have to go into my menu. For most of my photography where motion isn’t a huge issue, I use back button focus and manual focusing because, especially in my landscape work, I’m very fussy about crisp focus as a starting point. And that was how I approached this photograph. However, in post processing, I wasn’t happy with the sharpness because I wanted this image to have a dreamier feel. So, I intentionally pushed the clarity slider to the left to soften the focus and even added a touch of Orton Effect (just a tad in the midtones - when I use Orton, which is rarely, I use it “judiciously”). Now, I’m a bit puzzled why you’re concerned where my focus point was, if by that, you mean where I focused my camera rather than where I want the reader to be looking. I mean, when you looked at this picture where did your eye go? In most photographs the eye is going to go to a) where there is the most visual mass, which is often the brightest or darkest area of the picture, or b) where there is the greatest contrast. In this picture, the area of greatest contrast is exactly where I would like the reader’s eye to go or where I want the reader’s eye to be focused, namely to the birch trunk and stump. So, as far as I’m concerned, that’s the focal point. It doesn’t need to be sharp, at least not in my opinion. The softness of this image is not a technical error but an aesthetic choice (which, naturally, might not be to everyone’s taste). As for my choice of ISO 800. When I am making a picture in the field, I’m thinking about what are the most important settings in order to achieve what I’m aiming for in the particular picture I’m making. In this case there were two things on my mind - the depth of field and shutter speed. Because there was low light but a faint breeze, I felt I could get away 1/60 sec without blur due to movement. F8 just felt like a good depth of field front to back. So, that left ISO. In the past I used to worry and never go above ISO 800 for fear of noise. But with today’s AI denoise apps (I use DxO PureRaw) it is a non-issue. I have shot indoors in low light at ISO 3200 with my X-T3 (which is not known for its great ISO range) processed in post completely without noise and while I’d prefer not to go that high, it is the last thing on my list of fiddles. @Bill_Fach - Thanks Bill. I haven’t been doing photography that long, but even in the seven or eight years since I got my first camera, a Fujifilm X-T1 compared even with the X-T3 I’m using now, plus adding in the power of denoise apps, I am amazed at the dynamic range that can be captured in a single image. Out of habit, I still bracket but almost never find I have need to blend.
Hi @Kerry_Gordon, Thanks for describing your intentions with the image. I started making photographs in a time where the language of photography used focus to direct the viewer to what the subject of the image was. It could be back to front sharpness like edward weston or ansel adams or selective focus (sometimes called drop focus) with a chance to show off the bokeh of the lens, a technique often employed by street photographers. I think focus is still the most effective tool we have. I had to look up what the “orton effect” was and found examples where mist was being enhanced or simulated. Is that really what you were trying to achieve? What I saw you celebrating was a moment of amazing light, not an effect used to cover up for too little mist, and you lost the opportunity to show us your subject… Seems a pity to go to all the trouble of making a sharp image only to post process it into something causing an old guy (or a kid) to point at and exclaim “The king has no clothes (or sharpness…)”
Well, Guy, as a mentor of mine often said, “That’s why there’s chocolate and vanilla”. Clearly, if this was your photograph you would have done things differently. But I have to say, using the expression, “the king has no clothes” in this context, feels a bit rude to me. Just because this isn’t your cup of tea doesn’t mean it isn’t good tea.
No rudeness intended! But not everyone recognizes the orton effect in use and I was suggesting the image would be more generally accessible without it. The whole point of critique is to gather a wide range of views. Take it as you will.
Peace.
I’m glad you took the time to make this photograph. I’ve learned over the years that if I feel the urge to shoot something and I don’t for whatever reason I end up regretting it.
Anyway, this is another beautiful image. I love the strong contrast and pattern of the dappled light and the colours feel very harmonious. It’s as though this image is a form of visual meditation.
