Critique Style Requested: Standard
The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
The edge of the sea is one of the most major ecotones there is. I love watching the waves come in.
Any feedback is helpful to this amateur.
Nikon D7500
Lens: 18-300 mm f/3.5-6.3
ISO 100 f/8 1/500sec
Elsiabeth;
Two thiumbs up for your Land and Sea composition. Though I must confess here that I had never come across the word “ecotones”. I had to look it up in the dictionary. [I was an applied mathematician for many decades before I retired, so much of my descriptive vocabulary of nature is rooted in equations instead of botany.]
Anyway, getting back to the image, I like the way you divided the image between the land/sea ecosystems along a diagonal instead of a vertical left/right division. With the waves implying motion “into” the image from the upper left. And the arrangement of the sea weed creating a leading line into the image from the lower right. Meeting in the center area of the image.
The shallow depth of field adds a nice 3D effect.
A lot of nature/landscape photographers like to have “clean edges”. Often translated as nothing poking into the image from outside the frame. But I find that doing so make the image look too"photoshoped/manufactured. I bring this up because I really like the way the three sets of waves (e.g. ecotones) in the lower left portion of the image are encroaching into the image. It gives my “mind’s eye” permission to open up the image, allowing me to vicariously visualize what the rest of the beach would feel like if I was actually standing there.
May I ask were this beach is located? [It looks a lot like some of my favorite beaches along the central California coast.]
Cheers,
Franz
Elizabeth, I like the eye flow here, with the kelp and then the angled wave break. I find the bits of water along the lower left edge somewhat distracting and wonder about a slight change of position (although that might mean wet feet). The stick in the kelp also gets a lot of attention. As a dedicated detail nut, I would like to see sharpness to the bottom edge. Overall, I like your thinking and feel that you’ve got some good ideas here.
Elizabeth,
Kudos to you for going after this perspective; Being born and living in CA most of my life, I’ve spent and photographed on so many CA beaches - most times either a grand seascape, ocean waves etc., or shooting straight down - never have I gotten down to photograph in this way. I’ll have to remember that!
I too really like the perspective and the shallow depth of field. There’s a nice balance and interaction between the incoming water and all that’s remaining on the beach. The kelp and muscle? shells are classic and again you’ve captured a nice balance.
Technically, I’m wishing for a bit more detail in the blacks in the piles of kelp and sea-litter (ls that a term?) Not a biggie, but given that is what is in focus with the depth of field, it would be helpful.
To Mark’s point about the water breaching the lower left edge - it’s just one of those things where one either wants to see more of the blue water, or none at all. I’m wondering of there’s more and you cropped? just curious. Not an image killer, just something to mention
Thank you so much, Franz. I appreciate your comments, especially about the waves in the lower left. That was to so much an intentional compositional feature as simply a record of what was, and I didn’t mind it. The beach is in Scarborough, Maine.
Hi Mark, Thank you so much. I don’t so much mind the water along the lower left edge, and I might have cropped out that lower out-of-focus area. All things to consider and try, which I will do. The stick? Yes, that has got to go! Thanks as always for your help and specific tips.
Thank you, Lon. I do like getting down low on the beach, and this particular beach is in a sheltered bay so there is no wave drama–it’s all quite gentle. And on those waves in the lower left, it’s two votes against them and one for! I guess it’s a matter of taste. More detail in the blacks? Yes, that is a good suggestion. Thanks again.
