Autumn 2020 photo project - taken 10/04 /20 in the Quabbin region of Massachusetts
The fall of 2020 had an unusually high number of rainy and overcast days. The morning of 10/04 was one of the few opportunities that I had to include sunlight in my autumn images. This pond is a favorite of mine, because it contains a number of small islands, two of which are shown in this image (although you wouldn’t necessarily know they are islands from this composition).
I like the early morning light and the atmosphere of this image. But I’m looking for input on the framing trees along the left. Are they too much of a distraction or not, since they are both close to, and parallel to the frame edge. If I revealed any more room to the left, the trees further to the left get pretty messy, and that was not really an option. I’m interested in hearing how others see this.
Specific Feedback Requested:
Any critique or comments are welcome.
Pertinent technical details or techniques:
Canon 5D MKIV, Caonon 70-200mm f4 lens, at 173 mm, ISO 100, 1/4 sec at f16
Ed,
As soon as I saw the thumbnail I recognized it as your work. I do like the sun offering a highlight to the colors in the scene, and the processing here is really exceptional and creates a painterly look.
I like the composition as presented. I looked at the left edge and a possible crop of the smallest tree on that side, and I prefer it as is. Cropping it off draws too much attention to the larger single tree IMO.
I think you have portable fog machine you in your camera bag, and I want one!
I like this very much Ed. I’d say it’s in the top 2 of the trip. The back light is what carries this. The composition is really strong. I like how you included the water at the bottom left. A sign of an experienced photographer. Some would have cut that off and just had that brush run along the edge of the frame. The shadows are also handled well with those trees on the left having good detail and yet being dark. Yes, back lighting and fog is a great combination.
What beautiful light. Your composition has nice energy, even though it has a lot of obvious horizontal lines. The implied diagonal lines between the fog “blob” and the red tree, and the lighted roundish bush in the mid-foreground and the red tree give it some dynamism. The only nit I see is that it doesn’t look quite horizontal - maybe one degree or so off, tilted down to the right.
The ligth and those colours is something out of a dream.
I like the details throughout the whole image and the warm tones created by that beautifull ligth.
I can’t point a thing i would change.
What is it about the inclusion of the water that makes the image better or makes the photographer more experienced. Not disagreeing at all, as someone trying to grow just trying to understand what you are seeing/ thinking here.
Ed - absolutely stunning! I love the composition you have as presented - I think it would lose a lot of movement through the image if the trees were cropped out. I especially like the water at the front edge - it creates a nice s-curve carrying my eye through with the water wrapping around that front island. Definitely a wall hanger. Thanks for sharing.
The water provides a boundary for the brush which in turn creates a shape. That shape in turn is echoed further down. Repeating shapes are considered good when composing an image because it gives it structure. However, cropping the water out has it’s good points as well because it simplifies the comp. It simplifies because it draws the eye away from the brightness below and moves it to the mist and/or the red tree, where it belongs. So, I guess I changed my mind. You could go either way.
Experienced? When you’ve shot enough images you can look at one and see what choices the photographer made because you’ve been in their shoes. I figured that he made a conscious decision to include that water after considering the alternative. The fact that he considered the pros and cons is why he’s experienced.
Thank you all for your thoughts and comments, I’m glad you enjoyed this image. I was very worried about the trees, and the true value of NPN, is the perspective you get from a range of viewers. Bonny, I’ll check the waterline, you may be right, though one of the two islands looks okay.
Igor, great explanation to Dave Wallace on the inclusion of water. The only thing I’ll add about “experienced” to Dave is that I have visited this pond many times over the past 20 years. While it is now like an old friend, the seasons, light and weather conditions make it different every time. And 20 years ago I made the very mistake of cutting off the shore like Igor discusses, and I learned from it. Back then you couldn’t chimp on the rear of the camera to see that it didn’t work, you had to wait 2 weeks for the slides to come back from Fuji
@Igor_Doncov & @Ed_McGuirk Thank you for the follow up. Part of the reason I like being here at NPN is that there is explanation to go along with the images, even if it isn’t a critique, there is something to pick up from what others are seeing/thinking. I don’t get that anywhere else! It is interesting to see how two different choices can both be effective but as the photographer you have to think about what you want to create with each image. Good stuff!
IMO you nailed it, Ed! The trees on the left are definitely not a distraction as I do not think the image would be nearly as strong without that splash of autumn color. This is certainly a perfect example of how living near an area allows the photographer to become intimate and capture the nuances of the location. Of course the back lighting is gorgeous and the fog is the icing on the cake. I too think the strip of water along the bottom edge needed to complete the scene.
Beautiful scene Ed! The backlighting is really popping the colors and adding contrast to the scene. I particularly like the reverse z of the water in the foreground leading to the background fog. I would swear that you have a fog machine in your Backpack just like @Alan_Kreyger mentioned. The little shrub on the far right side of the image provides great balance.
