The photographer is looking for generalized feedback about the aesthetic and technical qualities of their image.
Description
Happy New Year everyone!
I was inspired to post this after seeing Bonnie’s recent “Forest Dancers” post. The reason is because these are examples of how the broader landscape can also be used with the ICM techniques; you don’t always have to have intimate scenes, patterns, etc. This is in the same stretch of river and scene that I posted my earlier ICM.
Specific Feedback
All comments, feedback and suggestions welcome. I’m always curious to hear feedback on color, WB, contrast, saturation and general processing.
Also, this begs the basic question, is there enough here to keep the viewer engaged? I like the textures created here, but not sure if there’s enough “meat” to keep you interested? What do you think?
Technical Details
Nikon D800E, 28-300mm @55mm f/16 1/4 sec iso 200, likely cpl. handheld, single frame, multiple movements during exposure.
Another beautiful ICM, Lon. I really like the sense of movement in this image. I spent some time a couple of weeks ago trying your movement, without any notable success-looks like it will take some practice. I really like the saturation and vibrant colors in this image-it creates a very lively and uplifting feel. Very well done.
Definitely meat here – or more fundamentally, perhaps, bones, as in the basic or large-scale structure of an mage. Then I would say you have a lot of good meat on the bones with the fine structure. The is an intricate cross-hatch pattern that almost has an embossed look in the top half. (It is less prominent in the reflections, which is even more interesting.) Colors and crop/framing look great!!
Hello Lon
I do quite a bit of this type of work myself, so I chuck a lot of my photos if I don’t find them appealing enough. In that respect, at first glance, I don’t think it would have made it through my selection. However, having spotted the reflection, I started looking more closely and I remain puzzled about some effects. So well done there! I don’t know if I’d want it on my wall, but there’s definitely great potential in how you worked this.
Grt, Ingrid.
Lon, the editing looks good to me. Nothing jumps out as a distraction so good job keeping things muted and natural looking. I also like the 4x5 framing.
To answer your second question, yes there is enough to hold my interest in the image. I especially like the reflection. The cross-hatch pattern and mix of colors help my eye move around the frame. It’s great seeing a unique perspective on an often photographed location like the Yosemite valley.
That’s a concept I’ve been playing with off and on for a while now. I.e., just exactly how many ‘recognizable’ elements does an image need. Any? A minimal amount, or…???
I did a fair amount of experimentation with very selective focus for a while and liked some of those results. But also a decent amount with ICM as well. And one of the conclusions I have loosely settled on is that ‘recognizable’ elements of an image shouldn’t be considered required. Using ICM as an example, sometimes I think it’s actually the movement of the camera that creates the ‘meat’ of the shot. Toss in a side of interesting color (and/or possibly some movement created texture), and some wonderful images can be made.
And I think that is what you’ve accomplished with this one. It is the movement and color that make this a terrific image.
So thank you for adding some evidence to my hypothesis.
