Any as always.
Is the foreground grass and bare snow adding enough, should it be included? Any other comments on the composition are welcome.
F14, 48mm, 1/8 second, single exposure, ISO100, tripod
Hi Alan,
I much prefer the prior posting, which felt intimate, dark and mysterious. There’s a lot going on in this one, but the large white snow in the bottom foreground is very bright in contrast and I think detracts from the whole image. The tree with the curvy branches plus snow is a lovely focal point, and I think the prior image captures it best. Nicely seen.
This looks like an image within an image. But above the snow is a wonderful image. In addition to many good features I like that wooden fence on the bottom. The challenge in this image is to somehow remove that snag in front of the fir. But other than that you have a really nice image.
Alan, I think less would be more here. There are so many elements in this scene that I think it does not do a good job of defining what is the subject of this image. Your prior post was much stronger at emphasizing the main subject (the snowy tree). I think you may have been trying to create some layers here, but to me that only serves to de-emphasize the interesting trees in the background.
If you really wanted to include the snow, I would lose the small foreground grasses, and only include a sliver of snow to create a “horizon”, and end up with a crop like the following. But I still prefer your prior post. Even in my crop here the “good tree” gets de-emphasized, and the other trees are not strong enough to carry an image IMO.
Alan,
Thanks for sharing the large view. I quite like the forest scene including the cattails; not so enthused about the snow. (I always find it difficult to include a band of snow) Not sure if the small bent grasses up front are enough to keep.
What is most interesting to me besides the main “snow catcher” tree are all the other “squigly” branches. I do see a crop that includes a little more top and right than Ed’s and slightly more off the left - and without the snow. I do think that nice tree stands well enough to anchor the scene.
Oh, now wouldn’t this be something in a snow fall or with more snow in the trees! I don’t recall if this is a place that you can return to. I would.
Lon
Thank you all for your comments.
@Kathy_Barnhart I appreciate your thoughts. I also prefer the prior posting but I had mentioned this view and wanted to receive feedback. My original concern seems to generally be confirmed, and the foreground does not help this scene.
@Igor_Doncov I was wondering if someone else was concerned with the snag you picked up. It was a bit bothersome for me as well but I chose to leave it as captured.
@Ed_McGuirk Thanks for the repost suggestion. I think a crop without the snow is the best option and agree the first post is stronger. The grasses were so inviting in the field that I tried to include them. As Kathy pointed out the contrast is just not helpful to the scene.
Lon, Thanks for the comments and suggested crop. I took a stab at what I thought you had in mind. I had thoughts of posting something similar along with snow and grass version. This is case where I wanted to like the grasses because in the field they were the only element in the large expanse of open snow covered ice and were quite striking to my eye. I still prefer the original more intimate scene best but this version is second IMO. The “squigly” snow covered branches were also interesting to me. Yes I can return here.! This state park is 10 minutes from home and my favorite place to hike and photograph. I still have many trails and areas that need exploring! I will return, and to your point I am hopping for a spring snow storm that is wet and sticky!
