Laghi di Fusine (Superiore lake) in Italy at dawn.
Somehow I'm not sure that the human figure fits in the scene here.
Unfortunately, I have no other, and cloning seems pretty ungrateful in this case.
Is it too much, or does it not contribute to the overall impression?
Thanks in advance!
>>> Otherwise, on the second photo looks like when my wife and I have a planned session.
Not a big difference to me.
I think that the figure in the image is actually what makes this image interesting. I feel with out the figurine the image might lose its mood.
When I saw this spot on the cliff, it seemed to me then nice for the integration of the human figure in the scene.
But because I don't have the shot without human figure, I am now somewhat in doubt.
Thanks a lot for your opinion Evan!
To understand whether the figure contributes to the impression, I would need to know what impression you intended to capture when you first arrived to the scene. If the answers are similar, then the figure enhances your vision.
Evaluating the image on its own, I agree with Evan that it works. The woman changes the focal point and her clothing / style makes me think of a person who was out for a leisurely walk stopping to enjoy the beauty / magnitude of nature (as opposed to an adventurer on an expedition). Definitely not a negative, just the story I get from it.
In short, I like it a lot and is a great contrast to show your range compared to some of your other otherworldly, futuristic work.
Like you noticed, everything was relaxed and casual, because the photos from the other side of the lake, a little earlier that I was planning as main shooting have failed due to dense fog and too much clouds on mountain peaks.
Thanks so much for input Robert and kind words!
I think the picture is very nice. I hope you don`t mind I took the liberty of doing a quick removal of the person. I think the figure add some extra to it. But could the figure be smaller? I am not sure. Anyways I think it`s nice both with and without the person and the picture holds a high standard.
I do not mind, but on the contrary.
It looks odd to me without a human figure (which could not have been smaller :)
Thank you for your efforts Jan (nice job about cloning) and compliments, now only opens up new horizons and new doubts.
I like it. In particular:
* The pose is vaguely determined, almost defiant. More interesting than the mood in the Instagram-chic version of this.
* The figure is offset, about on the third. That's just kind of nice and different. Usually a figure's back is centered in composition.
* But the figure has a very defined place in the composition by standing on that ledge. Doesn't look shoehorned in at all. In fact it would almost be weird to have that ledge highlighted in the composition without something on it!
The only thing that might be nice is if the island was a bit further to the left, closer to the line of thirds. Most of the interest in the photo is to the right. You could think about cropping a bit tighter or maybe edit a bit more color/brightness into the left side of the image.
I'm glad you like it and thanks for your comment Xander!
From what I remember, and I was then for the first time at this location, which is otherwise very, very photogenic, I could move a little to the left, but with more branches in the frame, which is not a bad idea.
With her legs appart and her arms straight like that it actually makes me feel like she's very tense, stressed out, while the picture, given the amount of Orton effect, gives a relaxing feeling, so I thought the two different moods didn't go well together, sorry. Her red shirt is also distracting me.
That's why I got into this issue and all my confusion about this photo, which although not planned turned out to be the best of all them from this location on this foggy morning. Thank you for your sincere opinion Nick!
(You're not the only one who thinks like that)
Maybe you thought of something like this.
Does this pose fit into the environment as you imagine?
Yeah that one is better, maybe even have one of her feet in the water like she's walking into it, to add some mystery, I feel like it's a very mysterious photo.
Sorry Radisa first one doesn't hit the mark for me your wife looks pissed like her camera and tripod just went over the cliff...
the second i do like however i would make only 1 adjustment, a crop...
Thanks Joseph to your always useful input.
There is nothing apologizing, you are the third, at least as far as I know to who this photo does not fit.
As for cropping for second image, I think you're thinking too conventional, although I am quite traditional in that sense. Sometimes I deviate from the golden rules. It came from my project of huge hi-res panoramas and human element.
How to cut now :)
makes more sense at that large of a scale i was only considering for use under 24x36inch still a solid capture
To be honest, I don't like my crop either.
Perhaps the original idea is still the best in its minimalist edition.
absolutely however i do like the addition of the light rays in the smaller version, they may not work in the larger shot due to distance from the border but the original shot is top notch... STOP FOOLING WITH IT!!!! lol
I'm not kidding at all, I thought like you, maybe too conventional, because the whole panorama did not come out in my taste. Just that.
These additions as sunbeams are irrelevant, if the composition and the story are not good.
i do have an observation on your recent post though ill dm you
Just so you all know - the composition and crop in the original are PERFECT. Not that I'm opinionated..
BTW Radisa - didn't realise that YOU are the Someone Up There. Better be nice to you.
I agree with much of the above. My biggest issue with the top image is that she is way too big. If she was half this size she would allow the scene to feel epic. She makes the trees next to her look small. She just doesn't look like she belongs there.
Now the bottom image - WOW! Love it.
Unfortunately she could not be smaller. Photographed at 35 mm. The controversy flashed and I'm glad, because that means that I was right when I was in doubt.
Thanks so much Ruth to yours inclusion on this topic!
Don't understand this, Radisa - as far as I can see you COULD have made her smaller, by zooming out. I presume that was not compatible with a decent composition.
I love the 1st image Radisa, but like others, it feels like the figure is too large compared to the rest of the scene and for me seems a little unnatural.
I'm also finding my eye drawn to, and anchored on the figure. I wonder if she was toned down a little whether that would help.
I love the image otherwise.
Thank you so much Alan!
Nothing here is unnatural, apart from my processing in terms of light and color balance.(this is not a composite). If I photographed at 16mm as I can, you could not see that island with a trees as now and a bundle of branches would appear on all sides...
The effect is very different in each, Radisa. In the first, it calls to my mind a promotion from a travel company for the location, or an advertisement for outdoor clothing. That's largely because of your wife's attire, and her size in the image (which I understand you couldn't change significantly without changing the nature of the image). The clothing fits the scene.
In the second, the figure is much smaller, but strikingly obvious owing to the colour, the contrast heightened by the clothing looking as if she's come from some other place, immediately creating a more fanciful, dreamlike or fantasy atmosphere. And Someone Up There has shone Her spotlight on her!
Big difference to me! ;-)
So for me, the first image is more prosaic and "ordinary", suggesting the reality of outdoors tourism. Of course tourism and clothing call for marketing, so the first image might earn you more...
Removing the first figure changes the composition for the worse for me by leaving a sense of something lacking, but maybe that's 20/20 hindsight.
Thank so much Chris for a comprehensive observation! Yes, strangely without a human figure, the composition seems somewhat inappropriate.
I agree, the image feels empty without the figure.
It seems that those who like the presence of a human figure were right.
On the first picture, I would have sat your wife, but 1/4 turned so you see part of her profile. Maybe with her legs tucked in next to her, or with her knees drawn up towards her chest but her arms relaxed across them. She could even prop her elbow on them like she's thinking deep thoughts. I think that would give her more the look that she is enjoying or contemplating the scene she is looking at. Just a thought. I love the colors and the mood in the photo, but agree that her pose looks like she's more upset then relaxed.
I really like the second shot as well. This photo makes me think she got dressed up for a date and is waiting and watching for her lover to get in before the storm rolls in.
Thanks a lot Elizabeth for your suggestions about posing and thoughts about both photos. Unfortunately, in the first case, everything was so fast, unplanned, and she might have frightened a little bit because she was standing on the edge.