Not a bad shot but the sky needs a little more definition and interest. If you post processes, I'd try adding gradient filter to drop the exposure for the sky down a stop or two. Also level your horizon, it's tipped to the L very slightly. Maybe increase contrast a bit.
I think you need to work on critiquing your own images, and learning to identify what should be seen and what should bot be seen.
I suspect that you are psychologically attached to the subject, as opposed to thinking of it as an image. Especially with minimalist, you have to be pre-visualising the image. I therefore suspect that your critical point of failure lies in your psychological process.
In this case, the subject, the rocks, are not graphically simple or visually interesting; they are just a bunch of rocks on the ground.
I've been sitting here for 10 minutes trying to think of something positive to say about this, and I simply can't.
In terms of style, I would suggest looking at the work of Michael Kenna. But beware, half the world has tried to copy Kenna, and mostly they are utterly forgettable for that reason.
Rule of thumb: If the sky is boring, include less of it (or nothing at all). Also, careful where you tread when thinking about a compossition, you don't want footprints in your image.
You're basically dealing with 3 elements here: Rocks, water and beach. Now how do you create visual interest? You decided you'd make a B&W image, so color is off the table. That leaves shapes, patterns, texture, contrast and the like. There's no pattern here and the shapes of the rocks aren't anything special either. Texture? Hard to tell, maybe when the light is low (sunrise or sunset). But you do have contrast here: The rocks are rather dark and the long exposed water contrasts it nicely. does it make sense to include the beach? Maybe, if you can create another point of interest. The beach itself is pretty much featureless (footprints don't count), but you have the water rolling in and out and you have long exposure - or in other words: Shapes.
So there you go: You need to drop the sky, be careful not to leave footprints, emphasize the contrast between water and rocks and watch the patterns the water leaves on the sand as it is rolling in and out.
Couple more points: Try either a wide angle lens and get close to the first rock, try different angles, I should imagine this will work best close up and panning down slightly. Capture patterns in the water that reveal motion, it's important to get the water sharp and expose for around 1s. Often there are fascinating turbulences when water flows through rocks formations, I'm attaching an image to give you an idea what to do with water, how to apply structure to it.
@ Thorsten Westheider, in fact read the review again. Absorbing your well organised and structured analysis. followed by logical tips.
Much appreciated.
Not a bad shot but the sky needs a little more definition and interest. If you post processes, I'd try adding gradient filter to drop the exposure for the sky down a stop or two. Also level your horizon, it's tipped to the L very slightly. Maybe increase contrast a bit.
Hi David, review is appreciated.
I think you need to work on critiquing your own images, and learning to identify what should be seen and what should bot be seen.
I suspect that you are psychologically attached to the subject, as opposed to thinking of it as an image. Especially with minimalist, you have to be pre-visualising the image. I therefore suspect that your critical point of failure lies in your psychological process.
In this case, the subject, the rocks, are not graphically simple or visually interesting; they are just a bunch of rocks on the ground.
I've been sitting here for 10 minutes trying to think of something positive to say about this, and I simply can't.
In terms of style, I would suggest looking at the work of Michael Kenna. But beware, half the world has tried to copy Kenna, and mostly they are utterly forgettable for that reason.
Hi Edward, thanks for the energy.
Rule of thumb: If the sky is boring, include less of it (or nothing at all). Also, careful where you tread when thinking about a compossition, you don't want footprints in your image.
You're basically dealing with 3 elements here: Rocks, water and beach. Now how do you create visual interest? You decided you'd make a B&W image, so color is off the table. That leaves shapes, patterns, texture, contrast and the like. There's no pattern here and the shapes of the rocks aren't anything special either. Texture? Hard to tell, maybe when the light is low (sunrise or sunset). But you do have contrast here: The rocks are rather dark and the long exposed water contrasts it nicely. does it make sense to include the beach? Maybe, if you can create another point of interest. The beach itself is pretty much featureless (footprints don't count), but you have the water rolling in and out and you have long exposure - or in other words: Shapes.
So there you go: You need to drop the sky, be careful not to leave footprints, emphasize the contrast between water and rocks and watch the patterns the water leaves on the sand as it is rolling in and out.
Couple more points: Try either a wide angle lens and get close to the first rock, try different angles, I should imagine this will work best close up and panning down slightly. Capture patterns in the water that reveal motion, it's important to get the water sharp and expose for around 1s. Often there are fascinating turbulences when water flows through rocks formations, I'm attaching an image to give you an idea what to do with water, how to apply structure to it.
Hi Thorsten Westheider, appreciating your review and good tips. thanks.
@ Thorsten Westheider, in fact read the review again. Absorbing your well organised and structured analysis. followed by logical tips.
Much appreciated.