I loved the verticals of the dying trees in a marsh. I can’t decide whether or not to include some water at the bottom as in the second image, or not. Both seem to be better viewed at a little distance from my monitor
Any comment welcome
Is this a composite: No
Lovely scene!! The trees stand out so nicely from the BG, which is lovely in its own right. I prefer the second as the first feels crowded at the base.
On the first, I would crop from the left a tiny bit to eliminate the bottom of the white trunk right at the edge.
Eddie,
Wow, what a stark and facinating environment - Sad of course for the trees, but what a great photo opportunity!
I’m torn on the water at the bottom. While agree with Diane that including the water gives the scene more room, I’m just not sure there’s enough of it to add value - although having the water does help tell the story of why the forest succumbed… Still, I wish there was a little more, and I think for that reason it’s not helping the overall comp.
The starkness of the trees is facsinating. Which leads me to the thought of a square crop of the right half. The trunks on the right I think are more compelling. And also, by cropping square and even eliminating the bit of sky, you really focus attention on the weathered snags. However, the broader view, including the water tells the better nature story - the cropped suggestion I think is more a story about the patterns and starkness of the old trunks. either work for me.
No other nits or suggestions.
Lon
The first one definitely works better for me. I find the water at the bottom awkward as a narrow horizontal stripe on an image that is entirely up and down. What works especially for me is that the trees are of different heights and the tree bottoms don’t all line up uniformly. That, I think, separates this from the typical ‘barcode’ composition and gives the trees a more stark appearance. A couple of small nit: clone out or crop out the trunk in the llc and lrc.
