Could I get a little feedback on this one please?

[ottor]

Not sure about this one ..... I immediately liked this shot, but over time, I began to dislike it.... Bouncing back and forth, I now have a showing at a local gallery and wondered if this is something that I could print out and hang. I was thinking, because of the immense detail in the photo, hanging a 20x30 on Aluminum with a standout would be a good way to present it. I'm beginning to like it again, so being as fickle as I am, I thought I'd present it for a little constructive critique ..

 

[tirediron]

In the right room, I could see a large metallic of this looking spectacular; the image on its own isn't all that exciting IMO, but as a decorative art piece in the right setting? I think it would be excellent.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I like the way it draws me towards the light and mist in the distance, but it's so much light gray not black and white. Not sure how it would look printed, I usually like actual B&W and more contrast than this seems to have.

 

[pjaye]

I personally, like it. But I feel like it's leaning to the left and needs to be straightened just a bit.

 

[ottor]

I personally, like it. But I feel like it's leaning to the left and needs to be straightened just a bit.

I know exactly what you mean about the 'leaning'.... Perhaps this is where I started to dislike the photo - I can assure you though, that the camera was level when shot. This is in a traditionally windy area, so it's the trees that are leaning. You can see, if you zoom in, that the background is level. - Now, we come to the discussion on straightening a photograph to satisfy the eye. The varying angle of the trees would call for an extreme crop - I might try it, but I'm basically against that kind of editing.

 

[pjaye]

I love the picture and would not want it cropped. I just can't get past the *feeling* of it leaning.

 

[astroNikon]

I think straightening it a little bit to the right would help alot. The problem is all the trees are leaning, not all in the same direction too.

Your camera may have been level, but maybe the ground wasn't.

 

[The_Traveler]

I personally, like it. But I feel like it's leaning to the left and needs to be straightened just a bit.

I know exactly what you mean about the 'leaning'.... Perhaps this is where I started to dislike the photo - I can assure you though, that the camera was level when shot. This is in a traditionally windy area, so it's the trees that are leaning. You can see, if you zoom in, that the background is level. - Now, we come to the discussion on straightening a photograph to satisfy the eye. The varying angle of the trees would call for an extreme crop - I might try it, but I'm basically against that kind of editing.

What is it that you mean by 'that kind of editing'?

 

[Bender]

I personally, like it. But I feel like it's leaning to the left and needs to be straightened just a bit.

I know exactly what you mean about the 'leaning'.... Perhaps this is where I started to dislike the photo - I can assure you though, that the camera was level when shot.

Your camera being level is irrelevant. If the photo "looks" crooked, then it is crooked.
Reality is not a factor in the viewer's mind. They judge a photo by what they see, not what you saw.

 

[Derrel]

Many photos that rely on a full frame's worthy of fine detail fall apart on the web when seen seven inches tall...this is a good example of a photo that has very little impact on the web. We cannot literally SEE the stuff we'd need to see in order to become immersed and engaged by this shot. The small details, the high frequency details? All are mostly lost in the web reduction. It's hard to tell how much is really "there". Regardless, a 20x30 inch print is a BIG print and that might be what this needs. This is not a fault of your work, but just one of the issues with how some types of photos do not translate well to wed-reduction sized image status.

 

[Forkie]

The trouble with images of lots of foliage or bare twigs and branches is that it's very difficult to see any depth in the scene. It just becomes a mass mesh that the eyes can't really distinguish.

Your shot also has very little in the way of shadow which doesn't help with the depth issue.

When considering taking a shot into dense trees, I always look at the scene with one eye covered first. That removes your natural depth perception and will give you an idea of how your shot will feel. If my subject/scene is still distinguishable, go for it. If not, I don't even bother.

Having said all that, Derrel could very well be right saying that in the right setting, this image printing large could find a home somewhere.

 

[Niner]

The whole thing is.... if you put this photo in a drawer and in about a half dozen years if you took it out and mixed it with some other woodsy scenes and showed to to any of us who see it here...would anybody remember seeing it before? If everybody remembers then it's good. If nobody remembers it is bad. If half remember it's ok.

 

[BrickHouse]

I personally, like it. But I feel like it's leaning to the left and needs to be straightened just a bit.

I know exactly what you mean about the 'leaning'.... Perhaps this is where I started to dislike the photo - I can assure you though, that the camera was level when shot. This is in a traditionally windy area, so it's the trees that are leaning. You can see, if you zoom in, that the background is level. - Now, we come to the discussion on straightening a photograph to satisfy the eye. The varying angle of the trees would call for an extreme crop - I might try it, but I'm basically against that kind of editing.

What is it that you mean by 'that kind of editing'?

View attachment 82405

This image, straightened, is so much more pleasing to look at.

 

[Desi]

It is a pleasing image. My only problem with it is that there is nothing at the end of the tunnel. My eye is led down that "path" and there isn't much there to see. Lots of cool textures though.