Honest opinions please

S

STM

Senior Member
This image was one that looked so good through the viewfinder but when the film is developed and proofed it kind of fell short of expectations. This was shot with the F2 and 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor on Tri-X

 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
STM said:
This image was one that looked so good through the viewfinder but when the film is developed and proofed it kind of fell short of expectations. This was shot with the F2 and 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor on Tri-X

Click to expand...

I'm experiencing Deja Vu. Have we seen this image before?
 
S

STM

Senior Member
Eyelight said:
I'm experiencing Deja Vu. Have we seen this image before?
Click to expand...

I don't think I have posted it before, but then again, according to my profile, I have posted a couple thousand posts so who knows. I can't remember where I put my keys or wallet most days, much less what images I have posted!

homer-doh.png
 
S

STM

Senior Member
Don Kuykendall said:
Just not sure where to look. There does not seem to be a focal point. I am heading to the beach Friday maybe I can find it.
Click to expand...

The intent was to look at the image more from a graphical rather than a landscape standpoint. I intentionally raised the contrast (partly though N+1 development) to almost a "chalk and charcoal" level, but like I said, it looked great in the viewfinder but as happens sometimes, what looks great at first just does not quite translate to the print.
 
D

Don Kuykendall_RIP

RIP :(
STM said:
The intent was to look at the image more from a graphical rather than a landscape standpoint. I intentionally raised the contrast (partly though N+1 development) to almost a "chalk and charcoal" level, but like I said, it looked great in the viewfinder but as happens sometimes, what looks great at first just does not quite translate to the print.
Click to expand...

even graphical needs a focal point. I know how it is with the viewfinder though. I see great things while I am out shooting sometimes and get back to the computer and wonder "Why in the world did I shoot this?"

That is the nice thing about digital though, it does not cost time and money to shoot. I was lucky when I was shooting film in that I owned two photo labs.
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Our minds do not see the same thing. May have worked with a vertical shot and keeping the top of the frame at same height. This would bring the bottom of the view closer to our feet and the taller sprigs of grass would then lead us into the narrower image. Maybe??
 
S

STM

Senior Member
Eyelight said:
Our minds do not see the same thing. May have worked with a vertical shot and keeping the top of the frame at same height. This would bring the bottom of the view closer to our feet and the taller sprigs of grass would then lead us into the narrower image. Maybe??
Click to expand...

You might very well be right. Dropping down from the 24mm to the 18mm or even the 16mm fisheye might have turned this into a winner

I might just have to go back there tomorrow!
 
F

Felisek

Senior Member
I actually like minimalistic pictures like this one. However, composition doesn't fully work here. There is a little "dune" at the top just right to the middle. I think this one works well. But the other one, on the left, near the edge, is bugging me. Not sure why, but it doesn't belong there, it breaks the composition. If you had a straight horizon, with just one "dune", it would work better.

Then, coming to the foreground, the nearest patch of grass is too central. I'd move it to a "strong" point, 1/3 or 2/3 of the image horizontally.

But that's just me. As you can see, everyone here has different ideas on how to make a perfect picture. And this is great! As we are all different!
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Wondering too (have coffee now) if there isn't more grass or that the grass is more visible to the eye, because the eye can see so much more detail. One of those shots that needs to be a wall sized print to recreate the vision.
 
Top