Sunrise on the lake/Need C+C please

[Warhorse]

At first I thought I would delete this shot because the background was out of focus.

Now, I find the image interesting, what do you think.

 

[FanBoy]

The foreground elements are a bit skimpy and needs a re-work of the composition. I think the focus would be on the lake grasses?

 

[SCraig]

I disagree. I like it like that. The only thing I dislike is the crooked horizon and the sun needs to be a bit more to the left.

 

[Shadowfax]

I don't find the horizon to be crooked, considering straight lines are virtually nonexistent in nature. But moving the sun a bit more off-center would increase the dynamics. And with the focus on the foreground,
a pop of fill flash - just enough to bring out more detail - would have been nice.
Just my 2¢.

 

[SCraig]

I don't find the horizon to be crooked, considering straight lines are virtually nonexistent in nature. But moving the sun a bit more off-center would increase the dynamics. And with the focus on the foreground,
a pop of fill flash - just enough to bring out more detail - would have been nice.
Just my 2¢.

The horizon is crooked by 0.7 degrees. Don't look at the tops of the hills, look at the shore line where the water meets the bank. Nature may abhor straight lines, but the laws of physics dictate that water is going to be as level as possible aside from a slight meniscus.

 

[Rick58]

I don't find the horizon to be crooked, considering straight lines are virtually nonexistent in nature. But moving the sun a bit more off-center would increase the dynamics. And with the focus on the foreground,
a pop of fill flash - just enough to bring out more detail - would have been nice.
Just my 2¢.

The horizon is crooked by 0.7 degrees. Don't look at the tops of the hills, look at the shore line where the water meets the bank. Nature may abhor straight lines, but the laws of physics dictate that water is going to be as level as possible aside from a slight meniscus.

But aren't you assuming that the far shore is parallel with the lens?

 

[SCraig]

The horizon is crooked by 0.7 degrees. Don't look at the tops of the hills, look at the shore line where the water meets the bank. Nature may abhor straight lines, but the laws of physics dictate that water is going to be as level as possible aside from a slight meniscus.

But aren't you assuming that the far shore is parallel with the lens?[/QUOTE]

OK, I'm not going to argue the point. To me the horizon is not straight and that's all I'm going to say.

 

[Rick58]

The horizon is crooked by 0.7 degrees. Don't look at the tops of the hills, look at the shore line where the water meets the bank. Nature may abhor straight lines, but the laws of physics dictate that water is going to be as level as possible aside from a slight meniscus.

But aren't you assuming that the far shore is parallel with the lens?

OK, I'm not going to argue the point. To me the horizon is not straight and that's all I'm going to say.[/QUOTE]

Easy big guy, I'm not arguing. I simply made an observation

 

[Warhorse]

I disagree. I like it like that. The only thing I dislike is the crooked horizon and the sun needs to be a bit more to the left.

The lake level on the left is actually a point coming out, the point is closer than the far horizon.

Thanks for the replies.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Perhaps a focus stack could've worked here, but this composition feels a bit cluttered, and I'm not a fan of the best part of the image being out of focus. I would have preferred seeing the grasses in focus and the leaves working as foreground bokeh. Or, get rid of the leaves entirely, better yet!

SCraig is exactly right about this shot not being level. Regardless of the positioning of the camera, the lens, where he's standing, what the water is doing, etc, the indicator of a level horizon can be found on the far horizon of the water in shots like this. Water does not tilt to the left or right in situations like this. Unless the world is tipping ever so slightly to the left, this photo is not level.