My dog - reflection

[rsilfverberg]

Taken with an Olympus 35SP from the 1960's and Tri-X 400 film.

 

[LaFoto]

To say the least about this photo would be:

I'm totally enthralled by it.

The theme as such would suggest an all different photo and then this: one that strikes by its symmetry in everything: the reflection, the diagonal shadows, the perfect framing, the position of the dog within the frame. All.

I love this one!

 

[DanielK]

I like how everything seems to be pointing you off to the right side of the frame but the dog and those square alcove things pull you right back in.

I'm curious, though. Why did you include the two verticle shadows and beyond them to the right of the frame? I am guessing you did it as just a little more insurance that the eye stops before exiting the picture and to enticing you back for another look, but I'm feeling that might be just a little too much extra clutter for an already strong composition.

In fact, It's actually sort of confusing me because the verticle shadow slants from being close to the edge of the picture at the top to being a little further away from the edge where it meets the ground. But then, when the reflection of the verticle shadow begins in the water, it's even further away from the right edge of the picture and ends up being further away still by the time it merges with the triangular shadow at the bottom. I'm guessing that this is from some lense distortion, because in real life the reflected shodow would mirror the actual shadow and vere back towards the picture's edge at the bottom rather than continue away from it.

Whether or not this is because of some digital manipulation or some lense distortion effect, it does make this peice a bit uncomfortable and awkward for me because my mind has to compensate and allow for something it knows should not be happening. I think this work would be just as strong, if not more so, if you cropped out the part to the right.

Very great shot, though.


Daniel

 

[rsilfverberg]

Daniel,
sorry I can't quite figure out what you mean so hard for me to answer.

If you look at the horizontal line created by the ceiling at the top you actually will see that drop off gradually as it goes to the right. The reason for that is that this is shot inside of an old military bunker and that's simply the way it was built.

There are no digital manipulations apart from adjusting layers and curve and spotting off some dust.

Regards,
Richard

 

[nikon90s]

all I can say is COOL shot

 

[danalec99]

wow!!!

 

[drdan]

Great, great picture. I stayed interested in it for much longer than most pictures.

I assume you experimented with different crops on this. The current crop is very interesting but it does seem to split my attention between the overall picture and the dog/reflection part. Did you try cropping to just barely exclude the break in the wall on the right? It still may give you the feeling of that long expanse of wall without so much of the distraction of the break and shadows on the right. Another potential crop point is just where the diagonal shadows form the point of the triangle.

 

[terri]

One of the best B&W's I've seen here, period. You have an excellent, artistic eye and it's working for you here. The stark walls, the dramatic angle of the shadows, and that perfect reflection..... it's just a big "wow" for me. My eyes are having fun wandering about this image. TriX400, eh? I hope you can get an enlargement with perfect sharpness up to 11x14, you should have no trouble, and this deserves to be large, and matted and framed very simply.

Stick to your vision; no cropping is needed here. I am so happy you left the vertical lines on the right, as it only serves to frame this piece. I can't think of a single other image I've encountered that captures so many shapes: you have the strong horizontal lines, the vertical line at the right, and a spectacular triangle flanked by a near-perfect square. Just amazing. Wonderful piece!! :cheer:

Ok, I'm gonna ding you here for using a terrible subject line that made me pass over for a look-see the last 3 days. Don't be so modest next time.

 

[drdan]

Yes, Terri is probably right.

 

[Jaffapie]

This is excellent - no critique i could give that would make it better, in my opinion

 

[DanielK]

Daniel,
sorry I can't quite figure out what you mean so hard for me to answer.

Ok, let me try to explain it again. I made some illustrations, we'll see if that helps to make my point.

You can see in the first illustration that the near vertical shadow on the right of the picture slants from the top right inward towards the bottom left. It even continues in this same direaction in the reflection when, according to the laws of reflection and perspective, it really shouldn't.

Illustration 1:

Now, in illustration 2, I've roughed out where the shadow should approximately be reflected in the water. Angle (a) should be directly below angle (A) and angle (b) should be directly below angle (B).

Also, line (A1) should be approximately the same length as line (a2) and line (B1) should be approximately the same length as line (b2) as I've shown in the illustration, but in the original picture these lines are clearly not the same length.

I've also shown where the long top and bottom horizontal lines meet lines (A1) and (a2) by connecting those points with the blue line (c). I've also shown where true vertical is with line (C). The top and bottom of line (C) are both the same distance from the right edge of the picture while the top of line (c) is nearer the right edge than the bottom.

Illustration 2:

I hope that better explains what I was trying to say before.

While I understand that this distortion is likely do to just a trick of the lense, it does bother me because my mind is telling me that something is wrong with the picture. That this image simply cannot exist in nature. Which is fine if you don't really care if you are capturing an accurate depiction of a natural scene, but with all else in the picture being dead on accurate to nature, this one problem proves to be a fairly predominate distraction from what would be an otherwise near perfect piece for me.

I don't know if it can be corrected or not, but the simplest option would be to just crop like I suggested before. I guess that's your call, though.

I do like almost everything else about the picture. It's still a nice shot.


Daniel

 

[markc]

Great shot, RS!

I do agree with DanielK about the distortion on the right. It does detract from the image for me. I doesn't take much of a crop to fix that. Do you mind if I post a crop that fixes the perspective?

 

[LaFoto]

Well, I've tried this suggested crop on my screen (the photo is large enough to let the righthand part disappear) and the crop does not make me happy. The - though somewhat inclined, I do see that, too - vertical line towards the right is absolutely fine with me and I would not want to miss it in this photo.

Despite its many very geographical lines, it still is a photo that was taken someplace, and to my mind the inclination adds to something alive being captured in this photo. This tiny imperfection - so I say, but my opinion is only personal, of course - gives more than it takes to this very picture.

I, too, believe that it will be nice as an enlargement in a frame (don't know the meaning of the word 'matte', but frame I do know ).

 

[drdan]

Matte is the thick cardboard of various colors which is cut out to frame the picture, usually inside a regular wood or metal frame.

 

[graigdavis]

amazing shot. I love it. I wouldnt have noticed Daniels points with out it being shown to me. It doesnt really bother me that much.

This would be a shot I would love to have framed for sure.