This is an image from a frozen, windswept morning spent on the shores of Lake Ontario this past February. I was drawn to this image right out of the camera and sat with it for a month trying to figure out how best to actualize my vision for it. First, was the incredible sense of glowing light that seemed to emanate from the ice formations. Second, was the muscularity of the branch – it seemed, with the ice daggers hanging off of it, like the tail of some mythical beast. And finally, there was the diaphanous sky setting it all off. For me it all took this image to an almost abstract, surreal level. In your experience, does this picture accurately convey my vision? Does it work for you compositionally and does the work in post feel appropriate to what I’m going for? In the areas along the trunk where the ice formed, I cut back on the clarity to try and accentuate the glow. Does it work to good affect? Any and all feedback is most certainly welcome and appreciated.
Kerry,
A most fascinating and unique subject. One thing you didn’t mention was scale. Other than your description of a “branch” to give a clue, this could very well be a tree or something much larger than it is; which helps put this in the abstract category. The sky/clouds are subtle and provide both context and mystery at the same time.
I definitely get the “muscularity” and the “mythical beast” references. Compositionally this works very well. I’m torn on the snowy twigs in the ULC, but the good news is that there are enough included that I know it’s not an oversight - and more than that, you would lose many of the “daggers” if you cropped. So I like the length here and overall comp.
Ok, so what I’m not seeing is the “glow” that you saw and experienced. I’m curious as to the choice of b&w. It works very well as presented, but I don’t get the sense of a glow with b&w. I imagine with color you could have either a warm or cool translucent glow? But I have no idea what the RAW looks like and from the overall diffused light, the original color may not have, any color.
So for me, I think you’ve successfully conveyed everything, except the glow. I’m just not seeing it - and in large part because I didn’t experience the moment.
Lon
Kerry, I’m of more or less the same view as Lon, I think you have been successful at communicating the muscularity and “mythical beast” (a great term) elements. And I too do not see the sense of glowing light coming from the sky. The best sense of glow here is from the backlit icicles in the lower right. As presented the sky does not add much to the image for me. If you were willing to move away from the square aspect ratio, i would consider a crop from the top that removes about half of the sky. My reasoning for this is as presented the tree divides the image in half, which in and of itself is not necessarily a problem, But in this case whats above the tree is less interesting to me than what is below it, thus I would crop from the top to reduce that area, and place more emphasis on the great shapes and textures in the tree.
Thanks @Lon_Overacker and @Ed_McGuirk for your feedback. What I meant by the glow wasn’t the from the sky but the translucent glow from the ice. I have tried a crop as you suggested, Ed. It certainly changes the image. Better?
Yes Kerry, I prefer this crop, eliminating the icicle that was previously in the URC makes the tree appear even stronger and more dominant.
Thanks, Ed. Sometimes something as simple as a crop can focus an image and give it so much more life. I value this site for that kind of feedback.
I really like this image and this sort of image. There have been several articles written here about finding your own vision, avoiding epics, patience, etc., yet not many unique images are appearing. Nor are the moderators recognizing them they do come up.
What I like about this is that it is so open to interpretation and reaction. Basically it’s just a log with ice on it. It’s not an abstract. For me it looks like Niagara Falls. Or it’s a giant wave.
One suggestion: is to not tell the audience what you thought this looked like. Give them the freedom to interpret it as it moves them.
I don’t really like the crop very much. I feel that the sky greatly adds to this image. Reducing it to concentrate on the log diminishes some of the richness of the composition. The small branches in the corners are unimportant and don’t need to be cropped out.
@Igor_Doncov Igor, I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this feedback. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with photographing “the grand landscape.” In my short career in photography I’ve already taken many and doubtlessly will take many more. When I find myself in a place of beauty I want to share the experience. But artistically it already feels limiting, constricting and for me, inauthentic. I’m searching for something more and I can feel a deep sense of yearning in me to find it or, at the very least, a sense that I’m moving in the right direction. I’m not suggesting that this photograph is the culmination of my search. Far from it. It is more like the beginning or very near it. But I feel the need to make a commitment to take photographs that are other than those that are sure to please.
I agree with Igor when he suggests to NOT tell us what your vision was. I do definitely get the muscularity and the tail of the mythical beast. But there are other ways to see this, too.
I love these ice formations, and I think you did a really good job of capturing this one. It can be really difficult to get the “feeling” that you are talking about. I don’t think that the glow quite came through on this, but I know what you are talking about. It is doggone hard to get to show up, as you are talking about something that is bright in a white setting.
I also agree that the sky adds to this. I understand wanting to get rid of the distractions, but I like the sky in there.
Well done; it definitely caught my eye! Cool!