ICM is such an inexact process, with results being infinitely variable. Each attempt has its own unique character, some totally unusable and some that may present something different to what was attempted or expected.
Just as an example these are shots of the same general subject, taken at the same location and within seconds of each other. I think they each deliver a certain level of mystery, each may appeal differently to each viewer.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on these - do any strike a chord with you, are there any that move you either way (ie really like or dislike)?
I'm personally drawn to the second and third, and for entirely different reasons.
The second has such a beautiful appearance of depth and dimension that to me, it almost seems to pop right out of my screen. I'm not sure how you managed to create such an effect, but I very much like it. The comparatively subtle colours in this one work to the advantage of the image as well, letting the subject be the water, rather than the sky. The dark patch at the horizon serves to give it a further feeling of depth.
The third works for me as less of an abstract, but more as a traditional landscape of the same scene might. The (presumably) upward motion of the pan draws my eyes straight to the darkest portion of the image, namely the trees. Their sharp silhouettes stand in a bit of contrast from the smooth tones of the sky behind them, keeping my eye's attention long after the leading lines of the water brought me there.
Two very fine images, Alan!
Thanks for your kind words Matthew. I agree with your assessment of the 2nd image. This was achieved by the camera movement itself and enhance in post by raising the texture level of the image.
The fourth seems to be the most intersting from my personal perspective, IMO just the right balance between abstraction and reality.
Thanks Hunter. It's great to see varying perspectives.
The depth of color and contrast in the second image appeal to me. Keep up the excellent work!
Thanks Patrick, great to hear your voice.