Silhouetted Tree ... Somethings Missing

astrostu · Sep 6, 2006

I took this image awhile ago, and I like it, but I just think it's missing something. I'm not sure how to describe it other than to say that it just doesn't "pop" to me. I'm thinking perhaps I should've used an HDR technique and merged it with a flash photo of the tree in the foreground?

Advice would be appreciated.

forceflow1049 · Sep 6, 2006

Where is the image? I can't find it on your site

niccig · Sep 6, 2006

I don't see an image....

Oldfireguy · Sep 6, 2006

Tells me I'm forbidden.

astrostu · Sep 6, 2006

Grr. Alright, I'm experimenting with Google's image hosting service and apparently now I know why it's in "Test" mode. I've put it on a different server now that should work.

Weaving Wax · Sep 6, 2006

Don't use google. Use photobucket. It almost never has a problem linking and is really easy and user friendly. I've been using it for a long while.

As for the picture? The background seems a little dark. I'd brighten it up a tad. Also, I'd crop it a bit. I notice the sky more than the tree.

astrostu · Sep 7, 2006

Weaving Wax said:
The background seems a little dark. I'd brighten it up a tad.

By "background," do you mean the sky or the mountains/tree?

D-50 · Sep 7, 2006

I think the photo works well. I like the sillouette (I always spell that wrong) I dont think having the tree lite up would do anything for the shot. If anything maybe enhance the contrast or colors of the sunset to make it pop a bit more but overall I think its a great shot.
Here is a quick alteration I did, not too different but I adjusted the contrast a bit and use a luminosity mask as well.

Rob · Sep 8, 2006

The exposure's fine to my eye, but I'm not sure about the smack bang in the middle tree aspect. I'd probably have offset the tree to the left or right somewhat. Just my take on it.

Rob

astrostu · Sep 8, 2006

I really like what you did, D-50. I hadn't thought to adjust the contrast like that, and it looks neat. To take Rob's advice along with that, perhaps if I cropped the right third of the image off it would look better.

aNgLiaM · Sep 9, 2006

sky is great. the missing aspect is the trunk of the tree, imho.

Alex_B · Sep 9, 2006

aNgLiaM said:
sky is great. the missing aspect is the trunk of the tree, imho.

Damn, someone wrote this before I could

Totally agree. Nice shot, but would be enanced if one could se the trunk of the tree. That would separate it more from the rest of the horizon and make it an object of its own. In order not to make the tree to dominant in the scene, I additionally would move backwards and use a slightly longer focal length to compensate for this with the background.

Then again, maybe that tree was located in a way you could not do that... bad luck then, always happens to me too :wink:

2Stupid2Duck · Sep 9, 2006

I agree completely. The sky is fine in the first shot. The tree needs a trunk.

astrostu · Sep 9, 2006

Alex_B said:
Then again, maybe that tree was located in a way you could not do that... bad luck then, always happens to me too

Yeah, I was on top of our observatory roof on campus that's about 5 feet long and wide ... and the tree was maybe 20 feet away, so I couldn't move much. I could've perhaps knelt down and aimed upwards to get more of the trunk, but if memory serves me correctly, I think the trunk was well below the observatory roof level.

meotter · Sep 11, 2006

Rob said:
The exposure's fine to my eye, but I'm not sure about the smack bang in the middle tree aspect. I'd probably have offset the tree to the left or right somewhat. Just my take on it.

Rob

i'm with rob, i don't know if having the trunk would improve this image. however not having the tree dead center will immediately improve it. cropping it now won't help as much just because you'll lose that fantastic sky.