A couple of ICM landscapes taken when experimenting and working to improve my technique.
Both are 1 second exposures, handheld.
Sincere feedback always welcomed to gauge appeal and interest in this kind of work. The only opinion that is wrong is the one that remains silent.....
The first one definitely appeals to me more. I like it a lot. It gives a sense of calm.I like how the two layers on the ground blend together, and how the sky is more nuanced.
The second seems a little discordant and more abstract to my eye. The sky looks like it's two distinct shades working against each other, and I'm not sure either color in the ground has much definition.
Well put, Matthew - pretty much my reaction.
All good points Matthew and I appreciate your feedback. This certainly gives me food for thought.
I like the first one, Alan - it has a nice, dreamy feel. While I don't feel as strongly as Matthew about the second, he has articulated very clearly aspects of the first one that appeal, and why the second is not as compelling as the first for me as well.
As you know, I'm not really a fan of this technique, for reasons I can't really explain - but maybe there's no explaining subjectivity.
What I find catches my eye, in a not-so-good way, in the first image is the little streak taking off to the right from the peak. It creates a sensation of movement for me, at odds with the placid landscape. In the second, the streaking is more widespread, and is somehow absorbed better into the overall effect. This image does have its own appeal, in this regard.
They are both beautiful! Perhaps that's all that matters. Love the colours.
Thanks Chris. Your comments are appreciated as always and encourage me to take a second look at these.
Even if not a fan I understand and value your perspective, and seeing as you do through your eyes helps identify flaws that may have been overlooked.
Hi Alan. Greetings. For me, these frames are participants following a clear concept. Appreciating them as beautiful work of abstract art. Chequered pattern adds contrast to the blurred background and hence is more appealing to me. Analogous palate of Cyan, Green and Blue are attractive too. Beautiful work. cheers.
Thanks Vijay, I appreciate the feedback and happy you like them.
#2 gets my vote. I just enjoy looking at it more - I'm very technical as you can see.
Thanks Robert. I actually like to hear non-technical viewpoints as I feel that as photographers we may tend to analyze rather than react to what we see and feel from an image.
I know that I tend to fall into that trap and try my best to see and not think.....
I'd love to get to the point where absolute beginners feel comfortable offering opinions, as these are free of the technical baggage we are inclined to carry with us.
It's really interesting, my first thoughts went to liking the first one more but after a moment it, I favored the second a bit more. I had to think for a few minutes as to why that was.
It came down to that the second image as a single direction of motion... while the first has opposing directions of motion of equal weight. -- In the second image my eye flows from one side to the other, while in the first my eye stabilizes then settles on the peek as the focal point.
Both are great though; it's just a difference in motion to which I prefer. It's actually an interesting example on how motion plays a role in photography given equal scenes.
That's a really interesting perspective Joe, thanks for sharing.
I wonder if that change will be persistent, especially if you were to view briefly so as not to analyze.
Motion is the name of the game in thee types of images so it's interesting to experiment.