The Ibex Dunes at Death Valley take on a seductive sway as the sun begins to dip below the horizon.
Type of Critique Requested
Aesthetic: Feedback on the overall visual appeal of the image, including its color, lighting, cropping, and composition.
Conceptual: Feedback on the message and story conveyed by the image.
Emotional: Feedback on the emotional impact and artistic value of the image.
Specific Feedback and Self-Critique
I took this image in late January during my first-ever visit to Death Valley NP. The dunes appealed to my pull towards abstraction; this is one of my more literal dune images, but still has an abstract aesthetic (I believe). I think itās solid; I like the balance, the vertical treatment (also have a landscape version, which I have upload here for comparison), the lines and contrast. One reason Iām sharing is because Iām too close to the image, and while Iām confident thereās room for improvement, itās hard for me to see.
RE: critiques, Aesthetic: is there enough of the scene present? Howās the b/w processing in terms of visual appeal? Conceptual: Because I love abstracting scenes like this, I always wonder if thereās enough of a message or story. Does it need one? Emotional: There are thousands of DV dune images in the world; does this add to the story of the dunes? Does it have value outside of my personal preferences and experience of capturing the image?
Competition question: This is an image I would enter into a competition, as it represents my style and vision well. As I said, I think itās solid. I just donāt know that itās āstand out,ā that it says anything new. If itās for my personal enjoyment, then that doesnāt matter so much. But in sharing and submitting, it seems as though thatās important! Whatās missing that would make it stand out? Or in general, in a world swamped with pretty landscape images, what makes the ones that make you look twice stand out?
Canon EOS R, 100-500mm lens. Image at ISO 200, 400mm, f/13, 1/125", likely on a tripod but not sure. Processed primarily in Lightroom Classic with a light clean-up in PS. Main edits were b/w conversion, a patch of cloning to clean up a little sand sliding in one area, cropping out distractions/dead space at the top.
Wow ā this stands out to me!! The undulating patterns are unusual and very interesting. My first thought, seeing the vertical, was that it felt cramped on the sides. The landscape format fixes that beautifully! I could wish for a tiny bit more on the left (and the top), which could be done with added canavs, if youāre into that.
Thanks, Diane, for your thoughtful comment and kind words. Youāve pointed out a habit of mine: pushing my subject to the edges I did a very quick (and imprecise) version incorporating your suggestion about the landscape version to see how it felt. Curious what you - or anyone reading this - think!
Yes! To me, the less-crowded composition lets me relax, move around and enjoy the wonderful subtleties ā and wish I was there!
One thing to beware of ā adding dark edges can look good on a monitor but imperfect tonal matches can show in a print, or on someone elseās monitor. I always put a Curves (or Levels) adjustment layer above the stack and lighten the mids or highlights to have a good look at the darks, and do any necessary cloning on the layer underneath to smooth up the edges.
Thanks for your comment, Diane! Your observation is why I emphasized āquick and imprecise āā¦ I could tell on my monitor that the blacks werenāt matching, but wanted an approximation for comparison purposes. Now that I see the rough result, I can decide if itās worth it to go in and fine-tune. Your feedback makes me think thatās a yes?
Really nice dune take. I am with Diane on preferring the landscape version. The vertical does feel tight to me and, while quite graphic in its lines, lacks the mood and overall visual impact of the wider view. The modified version works quite well for me.
Thanks, Harley! I appreciate your perspective. Your comment is reminding me of the bias I have for portrait orientation. My experiences with landscape photography are so far very limited, and as I stretch into that genre, I want to remember to regularly challenge that bias. Good stuff
Hi Beth - these are outstanding images in terms of simplicity and drama. I also have to congratulate you on how well you analyzed your photos and asked for feedback. I see now how short-changed I might be leaving people when I post my own stuff for critique. Definitely room for me to improve there.
Both Diane and Harley have given some solid responses and so Iāll just chime in on portrait v. landscape presentations. Iām like most photographers in that I tend to landscape which is not your habit. No right or wrong, but I think that if you are producing work for contests, verticals are at a further disadvantage just because of the tendency to work in landscape.
Horizontal images fit better on screens and they are generally more open and inviting to longer looks and exploration. At least thatās my opinion. Iāll be curious to see if Tim says something similar for contest submissions.
That said, I have two large vertical prints hanging on my walls now and that was a deliberate choice - one is grouped with other, smaller, horizontal prints and the three work well together. I think the portrait dunes photo will work well in a group of similar images. Either just b&w or dunes/desert photos. Very strong graphically and itās just so pure in the shapes and light.
Anywayā¦Iāll put a sock in it for now. I hope that you show us more of your work even after the guest critique and that you join in the discussion of other photos you see for review. Cheers!
Hi Beth, these are both wonderful images. Well seen and definitely worthwhile in the the crowded DV image-scape.
I really like the processing in the vertical. The higher contrast sets the scene off nicely. I think @Diane_Miller and @Harley_Goldman provided some great input about the two versions. For me, I would love to see the landscape version processed in the same way as the vertical. I think it would be awesome.
I think the landscape version is awesome! I couldnāt resist playing a bit ā hope you donāt mind. I wanted to see one of the ridges stand out just a bit from the others, and can rarely resist some edge burning. I think Iād play even more with the very bottom where the ridge tends to pull roving eyes out of the frame.
Definitely as āstand-outā image. the undulating lines lead you deeper and deeper toward the final peek. It makes me want to explor the little valleys along the way. The shadowed side really helps to pull your eye to the light. I also like that you were careful not toe have the dune start out of the corner of the frame. I just canāt find anything missing.
First, Iām with the others in my level of appreciation for this scene, especially the landscape version. I too really struggle with allowing space around the edges of my subject and that is probably the most common critique I have received from the other fine photographers here. Maybe you and I can be the vanguards towards a new movement towards āpressing the edgeā.
I also wanted to comment about the nature of the questions you asked in your request for this critique. Really, really thoughtful inquiries, and I echo @Kris_Smithās appreciation for this, too.
Thank you, Connie, for your very kind comment!! You named some of the reasons I love this image, too. Interesting you point out the choice not to align the dune edge into the corner. Iāve been experimenting with that in my abstract architecture photography, as it sometimes anchors an otherwise untethered scene. But with landscape or nature images, itās often not pleasing. Iām glad you commented on that, as it made me reflect a bit on the differences. Thanks!
Ha! I love that idea, Jeff. Iāve always had a strong contrarian streak in me (which has only gotten stronger as Iāve matured, for better or worse!), so taking up the mantel of āpressing the edgeā resonates with me. As the saying goes, āIf youāre not living on the edge, youāre taking up too much space.ā (And the contrarian in me is bugged by that sentiment in its original intention, but it works somehow for our creative purposes!)
Anyway, thank you so much for your thoughtful comment and appreciation for my critique request. I pay the bills by being a professional coach/mentor coach, so asking questions is my bread and butter. It also brings to mind the IT maxim, āgarbage in, garbage out.ā The more thoughtful the input/request, the more thoughtful the output/response.
Thanks, David, I really appreciate your opinion about how this fits in the greater DV oeuvre. Your comment about the landscape version, along with othersā feedback, is inspiring me to spend more time with that one. I look forward to going back to it soon!
Thanks, Kristen, for taking the time to share your thoughts and experiences! So appreciated. Your point about the landscape orientation is well-taken and one Iām going to continue to work with. When I go through my images as a whole, Iām guessing 80%+ are portrait orientation. Perhaps one reason: I do a lot of abstract, and there are so many times when a shot I took horizontally becomes much more interesting when I rotate it in post! Itās like itās suddenly energized, at least to my eyes.
Iām also a fan of diptychs and triptychs, so glad you mentioned the idea of pairing. Iāve done a few with my dune images from DV, and they work well together.
Taking your advice to heart, Iāve spent some time today commenting on othersā posts, which is such a great way to learn and connect. I look forward to continuing to carve out regular time to engage with and contribute to this community in meaningful ways!
Hi Beth - sorry for being a bit late on this one. There have been a lot of submissions!
All of the versions Iāve seen are strong photographs and there are pluses and minuses for each for different reasons.
I really like the first image although I think it has a little too much at the top of the frame. This version has offset curves which work better compositionally in my opinion.
Of the landscape versions, the main one you posted is the one I prefer although Iād be tempted to crop slightly from the right hand side.
Images of dunes are, as you say, very popular and we get many entries to the competition. Judges are looking for that āextraā element that raises an image above the rest. For instance, the small āavalancheā in the foreground works to add interest in my opinion.
Iām not sure the image would do well in a competition for this reason but that doesnāt mean it isnāt a strong image on itās own.
As for potential changes to the edit - I like where youāve lifted the black point a bit and so I took the portrait image that I prefer the composition of, cropped it a bit from the top and a tiny bit from thebottom. And then dodged and burned to bring out the textures in the sand and also to emphasis the centre of the image a little more.
Itās the textures on the very rim of the dune that make the photograph interesting to meā¦ The main structure of staggered curves works well but has been done before but I love to see small intricacies like the edge and hence emphasising them would draw people in more (in my humble opinion)
p.s. I noticed you cloned the small avalanche out - so I put it back in again as I think it adds character to the imageā¦ Thereās a movement toward too much āperfectionā in images these days in my opinion. Iād be interested in what you think.
Thank you, Tim, for taking the time to provide such thoughtful and thorough feedback! First Iām glad you like the image in general. Thatās encouraging :-). Even after looking at the landscape versions, I also tend to still like the portrait orientation best. And I agree re: there being too much space at the top. Your edit gives it more balance.
Iām not especially into making things āperfect,ā especially scenes where nature has a mind of its own (which I guess is 99.9% of the time, LOL!). RE: the small avalanche, I was torn about that. I tried to step back and decide if it was distracting to me, and this was a toss-up in my original thinking on this image. Thereās a line between these perceived āimperfectionsā being part of the character and story of an image, and being a distraction. I fully admit to not having a good sense sometimes of where that line is. The avalanche was visible but not obvious/dramatic enough to me that I thought it added anything. Maybe its subtlety was actually its strength? Since avalanches are part of the story of a dune, I will consider this differently with this and other images!
I totally appreciate your overall point and am glad this came up, as itās a growth edge for me. Iāve noticed that when I watch/read critiques of othersā images, there have been times when Iām thinking ācrop/clone/de-emphasize that,ā with that being something in the scene I feel is a distraction, and Iāll be darned if the person doing the critiquing doesnāt say, āI love that branch/rock/person/whatever,ā or they say they just arenāt bothered by it. In the end itās a matter of personal preference and vision; and, Iām going to be paying more attention to what I perceive as distractions and perhaps use the safety of this community to test out some things to see if I can shift my perspective!
I did a very quick (and imprecise) version incorporating your suggestion about the landscape version to see how it felt. Curious what you - or anyone reading this - think!
