any - including creative
Does the Right lower quarter (water) have too much dead space ?
(If this is a composite, etc. please be honest with your techniques to help others learn)
ig
zuzartek
This looks vaguely familiar.
Welcome aboard, Karl! I am a bit torn on this composition. I love what is going on in the sky and water reflection. While the land provides a nice leading line, I find myself wanting to see a whole lot more of that sky and water. The land dominates too much for me.
This is a pretty scene! I did an edit for reference. I cloned the bits of trees in the ULC. Burned the left side, so the rocks don’t grab quite as much attention. And I copied more of the water to the right side. Like @Harley_Goldman, I feel like the left side is weighted heavy due to the rock face and trees. It’s just a rudimentary copy and paste, but it shows the idea. In general, you need 2 times as much negative space to balance out an image that is weighted like this one is.
Karl, welcome to NPN. This is a lovely scene with it’s nice warm sunset view and rugged coast. Like Harley, I feel like what you’re trying to emphasize isn’t clear. You could emphasize the coast by extending the land further into the frame, or emphasize the sky by reducing how much coast gets shown. I do like the details in the near cliff and the colors in the water below. You’ve also done a good job of filling, but not overfilling the frame with the cliff and trees on the left. You might try cropping to a 4x5 shape removing water and sky from the right.
This is interesting. Something I’ve never heard before. Is this ratio something taught in art classes?
It’s from an art photography video series I bought. Not an-exact ratio however. Strong color and texture have lots of visual weight and command attention compared to negative space. Negative space lets the weightier parts breath and help the viewer feel soothed and calm. It’s basically what the “rule” of thirds tries, unsuccessfully 2/3 of the time, to do. Balancing the visual weight… If the eye is drawn to one side or the other of an image, it’s unbalanced in terms of visual weight, texture and color.
Negative space also gives the eye some rest from texture. The coastline in this image is really nice, but most people would look at the coastline, like it, and then pan to the ocean keeping the coastline in their peripheral vision or in their memory. Without the negative space to the right, it’s an incomplete experience for the viewer and leaves them wanting instead of satisfied which is what I think @Harley_Goldman meant.
That’s my take on it anyway.
I don’t think I agree with that. Most people would look at the coastline in such an image and keep the ocean in the periphery. That’s why Ed McGuirk made his composition from this identical spot a few weeks ago in the manner he did. But you cropped out the land and increased the negative space and essentially told a different story, and it works as well.
I actually meant when on location in person, not viewing the image. When viewing an image, you have to look at what is in the image. 
This is a really nice image karl! Keep it up. 
At sunset the light on the rocks was really nice, hence its dominant inclusion - but then so was the sky! Tough to decide. Hopefully I have a few raw files with more sky - will post when I get back home
Here is the same image cropped to emphasize more of the sky but keeping the anchor ( coastline ).
I dont see a good 4:5 crop unfortunately - unless you can show how you see it 4:5.
Your next to last image was your best I think.
This one is the one for me! Beautiful! Balance and harmony perfected.
Thanks Bradley - i see it!
I agree - the balance is much better - thanks!
Bradley -
What course was that? Sounded interesting.
Craig,
The videos are:
THE CREATED IMAGE by Craft and Vision
David DuChemin
Thanks, I haven’t seen any of his videos but I have read some articles he has written.
A very interesting discussion! @Bradley_Strong’s first “copy&paste” suggestion clearly shows his point, and the wider frame cropped 2:1 is my favourite.
