The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
Killercrankie Bay is on the west coast of Flinders Island. This shot looks north east across the bay with Mt Killercrankie in the distance.
Taken just after noon on a very bright winters’ day.
Specific Feedback
I’m looking for general C&C on the scene but also specifically on the water movement in the lower LH corner. I really like the sunken boulders but find the “fuzziness” of the LH corner detracts from the overall image.
Technical Details
5Ds + EF 16-35 f/4 L @ f11, ISO100, 25s. 10 stop ND and CPL.
Critique Template
Use of the template is optional, but it can help spark ideas.
I agree. I think a shutter speed that freezes movement would have been better here. The current speed works quite well for the distant water.
Other than that this is a really nice image. The lighting is good. The composition is good. I like the colors as well except for the blue at the very top, which is an easy fix. Yeah, those rocks look so ‘sculptural’ due to the great light you had.
Agree with Igor - the fuzziness of the water detracts a lot from this very nice image , perspective, and comp. With images like this, I often use several different SS’s , since I can’t tell what will work well until the image is up on the computer in my studio.
I also find the un-naturally blue sky a little odd - less saturated and softer might be better.
I’ve cropped as much of the fuzzy rock out as I’m comfortable with, without (I think) ruining the image and I’ve de-saturated the sky more (I had done this in the previous image).
I’m finding the export to JPG seems to increase the saturation compared to the TIF file.
I agree with @Igor_Doncov and @SandyR-B opinions, so there’s no sense in me repeating similar comments. did you take any images without the ND filter so you could time blend in the water?
Great details in the rocks, nice job of the re-edit. I think I would have tried to keep that one smaller light rock under the water, but I see why you cropped where you did. You can copy this into your original file just ahead of the original image so we can more easily compare the two of them Mark. Just use the pencil to edit your original post.
The full composition is much better in spite of the fuzzy rocks. The leading lines in the full composition work much better. Is it possible to try some of the newer software out there to try and reclaim some of the sharpness in the FG rocks that are under the water?
