Discussion in 'Nature & Wildlife' started by sashbar, Oct 29, 2015.
This is -just- my own personal opinion, however I find this a bit too abstract for my own tastes. That is obviously a subjective statement, as a great many people do in fact enjoy abstract, however I just don't feel the colors here are really strong enough to carry the composition as a whole. I believe that it really needs some central defining subject matter to really anchor the image, otherwise the eye seems to float around wondering what it's supposed to be looking at. The image is nice and sharp, looks like a good exposure and the colors are pretty, however to me the image simply lacks something to really define it...not to be rude at all, but to me it almost looks like the kind of shot one might get from a camera misfire while the camera was swinging from your shoulder as you were walking past such a scene.
Again, just my own personal opinion.
Oh I don't know, I love everything about it!
I think this image is about texture more than colour. There are at least 5 different type of plant structure. Very nice!
I agree with Jim Walczak - there is no well defined subject in this image and this leaves (pardon the pun) the viewer wondering what it is all about as there is more than Autumn colours here. For me, one of the basic rules of composition is to keep things simple. The colours are nice and everything is sharp, but these aspects alone do not make an image. If it was me, I would find a different view of the "autumn colours" that allow them to be the subject of the image, rather than having the viewer search through the image for them.
Just take it as an impressionist painting guys.
I like the fact there is no obvious main point of focus, and if your eyes float around this display of autumn shades and colors, then I am happy
Separate names with a comma.