This image expresses my solemnity of experiencing destruction caused by a wildfire close to my home. As the thick smoke cast a strange color to the light, made the air unhealthy, and limited visibility, I became acutely aware of the fragile nature of both our ecosystem and my home in the face of a natural disaster. I felt sad for those who lost their homes and for the destruction of the landscape near my home.
Specific Feedback Requested
I would like to know:
-Have I created a composition that tells the emotional story I describe above?
-Does this image stand on its own to portray the emptiness of the moment, or does it need other images from the photo session to tell that story?
-How could I elevate the impact of the image to tell the emotional story?
I would also like to thank NPN for hosting this great opportunity for feedback and @Alister_Benn for providing valuable feedback. This is the kind of stuff that makes NPN great.
Thank you Matt for posting this image, it is really does feel quite apocalyptic and the sense of doom is very strongly felt. The incongruity of the colour palette tells us something is wrong and there is a real sense of bleakness about it.
I am truly concerned for the state of the climate and know so many people who now live in the genuine fear of some natural event taking out their property, or their water supply. These are hard times, and I believe as nature photographers we have a moral obligation to show these things in a stark and challenging manner.
Do not go gentle into that good night
Old age should burn and rave at close of day
Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Landscapes do not have explicit metaphors built into them - we, the viewer, adds them all. You know the story, the viewer does not. I feel if this was to work more successfully as a narrative for climate induced devastation, it would require more images, perhaps more with damaged human elements. One burnt Childs toy would break more hearts than a thousand burnt tree stumps.
This is a harsh lesson for us as landscape photographers, pretty much everyone value a human higher than a tree, or a wetland.
I think you are on to something here and a project would be very powerful indeed. When I was judging the NLPA photo contest last year one portfolio that was very successful showed the effects of forest fires in Tasmania. But it required numerous images to build up the whole story.
Thanks for raining this topic, I very much appreciate it.
My heartfelt gratitude for your generous feedback, Alister. I agree - this one image fails to tell the complete story and human impact. Most of my photos are best shown in series as I simply am not good at nor much interested in the “greatest hits” sort of image but rather the intimate scenes, details, and narrow views. I will check out the Tasmania forest fires images - thank you for the reference.
Hey Matt, great to see you here.
Just a few things:
I like the feel of the image - very moody and like Alister said, apocalyptic.
There’s a dust spot or something upper right that’s driving me crazy.
I think you have a lot of color cast here… try eliminating it if you can. One way to see is to use the average blur in PS as a new layer and you can see what the overall color tones are…
Thanks for the feedback, Matt. I missed that leaf in the corner - thanks for catching it. I hate it when that happens.
As for the color cast, indeed, but unless I’m misunderstanding you, it was the deep brown color of the light through the smoke. Here’s the average blur:
The raw file wasn’t much different from the posted one. And of course if I remove the cast, I lose the inherent color of the ambient light. The WB temp of both raw and posted is 5050.
But I think you might be referring to something else so please explain.
I think you raise an interesting question and one I grappled with on this image and all the others I created during this shoot since the light was quite brown, orange, and red throughout the sunset through the smoke.
The question is, “Do I leave the color as my sensor captured it at 5000K even though it looks unnatural, or do I adjust it to suit tastes?”
My response was, it depends. For this image and several others, I left it as is. For some others, I adjusted it. Check out this raw capture at 5050K:
When I submitted this to LensWork this week, I adjusted both temp and tint sliders to a more “acceptable” level, but it wasn’t the actual light color.
I think I’ll post this image and my question about it here on NPN in the critiques section and see what kind of discussion ensues.
Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read this far. Would be interested in your thoughts.
I think you would need more images to give the viewer an idea of what you’re trying to express, Matt. When I zoom in I don’t actually see anything that’s been burnt. The foreground grasses as well as the background trees actually look fine to me so I don’t think I would know that this is a fire scene or that there is smoke in the air. However, when paired with other images that show the destruction the fire caused, then we get the idea that there is smoke in the air and that a fire is destroying homes and lives. I do like the color and tonal values in this though, Matt. That tells a story so long as there is a background story to it. There is definitely a feeling of doom and gloom to this image no doubt brought about by the colors and the atmosphere. I like the foreground piles of rocks that add some interest to this. Is this a dry riverbed? Even not knowing about the fire, I find that I like this image, Matt.
