Why?

[abraxas]

Hi,

Something that has always amazed me is that when I show my photos I get a considerable amount of ooo's and ahhh's. I like that fine; but, when this photo comes up, things go dead. This is one of my favorite all time shots, probably because of sentimental reasons (a guy has to have at least one good day per lifetime). What is it I'm not seeing?

 

[Indecent Exposures]

Not sure - it gets an 'ooh' (and indeed an 'ahh') from me.

In my experience it's more difficult to appreciate landscape photos as there is no part of the shot for the viewer to immediately fix on - an object, person etc. Unless you were there with the photographer it's sometimes difficult to appreciate just how spectacular the scenery was.

 

[DeepSpring]

i dont see whats wrong with it either its an oohh ahhh for me. Probally what indecent exposures said

 

[LaFoto]

If you ask me, then I must say I just don't understand those who ooo and aaah over all your other pics but not this one.
This is so very MUCH a photo to oooo and aaaah over!
The scenery is spectacular, the water is extremely still, producing a perfect reflection, you managed to get it play-card-like mirrored, which I like very much in this case ... have you not shown it LARGE enough, maybe?

 

[Fangman]

I really like this and wish I had taken it - It would be on my wall.

I think Competition Judges would mutter something about thirds. (We always disagree with their verdicts at club). Try a crop reducing the foreground to bring the shoreline down from midway in the image. It will upset you and those beautiful reflections but may not be so confusing to the eye.
Now I will sit back and wait to be shot down!
Can I attach a cropped version? Thanks for permission

Slightly shorter

or letterbox

 

[markc]

I agree with the crop. As it is, it comes off as an abstract to me. Abstracts can be great, but it gets confusing when it's not obviously an abstract. Plus I've found that fewer people care for them. Plus there's the dicomfort of feeling like I'm upsidedown when looking at it this way.

 

[ksmattfish]

It may be just because it is such a typical landscape shot. People have seen it before. Mountains and sky reflecting in still water with centered horizon is wonderful to view in person, but it's been so overdone as a subject that people aren't impressed. Something in the foreground might help, but it would still be very typical scenic photograph. I think that composing so the horizon was higher, cropping out the half line of clouds might help. I also like Mark's idea of it as an abstract, but I would rotate it 90 degrees clockwise.

 

[abraxas]

Sure, go ahead. I wouldn't mind seeing a different crop.

 

[Iron Flatline]

I like it, but it doesn't have an obvious subject, and everything is far away. That might be part of the problem for some viewers - they need an object to lend it context and scale, such as a house in the distance or a moose in the foreground.

 

[Fangman]

Thanks - have posted a ouple of options above.

I think I prefer the wider view for the wall although it loses some of the original scene.

 

[Torus34]

As an aside;

Your print is a mirror-image with the horizon set at the center. Technically beautiful, but static. As a general rule, when the horizon line is placed further from the center, the print will be less 'peaceful' and more 'dynamic.' With prints that are not mirror-image, there may be definite benefits in placing the horizon line near to or in the center. The 'rule' is a double-edged sword.

 

[DVJLabonte]

I look at this and I don't see the ohh and aww about it. However I am sure that can be fixed, because techinically this is a sound image. Aside from the centered horizon, another think that really lays to my dissatisfied feeling is the place where the land dips. Its not center, or on a 3rd and really makes me feel that the image is lopsided when its not.

Also, the clould at the very top left (and reflected bottom left) being 'cut' bothers me slightly as well. Not sure why on that, perhaps its because the reflection of that cloud has a completely different hue.

Aside from that, I know the colors might be very close to the orginal, but perhaps a bit of an enhancement could really bring this one to life.

Remember, this is all my opinion.

 

[DVJLabonte]

Ok, I am back for another comment. I took a closer look at the image while I was playing with my own suggestions and I noticed something very strange. Perhaps you can explain it for me. I was looking at the image and I noticed a white line that at first glance looked like a strand of beach. On closer inspection, I had to come to the conclusion that you spliced the image at that point, and your stiching wasn't perfect. How did I come to this observation? Well, the white line is perfectly straight and runs the whole length of the picture, and it is a perfect mirror (as the effect of being reflected in water would be) on either side of this little white line.

I am not tryin to bust your chops, just trying to figure out this image.

 

[abraxas]

The white line is a beach, there was no splicing involved. The only manipulation involved was letting it auto adjust. When I did the auto adjust, I was quite pleased with the result because this is what I saw rather than what the camera (nikon coolpix 990) recorded. I spent quite a bit of time setting it up through the LCD and have cursed clipping reflection of the cloud at the bottom left.

My wife say the white line does something that she doesn't care for. She says I'm a stickler for keeping objects from forming lines through a photo and she can't understand why I would have here. I explained that this is one, huge salt sink/lake.

I had the image blown up and printed on a 36"x 48" canvas. Looks good in my son's entertainment room. I think it loses though in the comments dept. because of what has been mentioned about the lack of a specific subject.

I find I like to wander and examine all over the place on it. This is probably due to the sentimental value I had mentioned; I had been looking for a stillwater reflection shot in the desert for several years. This was the last morning of a five day trip to Death Valley National Park. From a distance I thought this was just another dry lake. I took the one shot and sat under the Mesquite trees and had lunch- no flys or bugs, just a quiet, nice lunch in the shade. Very strange, nice and memorable. It removed any semblance to objectivity I had.

I think the bottom may have a different hue, etc. because the lake is so shallow, maybe two feet at the deepest point. In fact, some of the algae/slime in the lake can be seen at the bottom right. The pure white beach is salt rather than sand. Very high quality salt in fact. About a mile or so to the south is a deteriorated evaporation facility.

This has really been a good thread and I appreciate the comments. At least now I can maybe understand what is going through my audience's heads rather than trying to smell something funny.

 

[DVJLabonte]

Well I am glad it wasn't splicing that I was seeing. However, I think your wife might be on to something. One of the things, even after I tweaked it in Paintshop that drove me batty (as it would with one of my own images) was that white line. It is too perfectly linear in a setting where nothing else is linear.

My crops and color enchancements really did bring the image to life. I would post if given permission, however, I have scrapped what I did, so I will have to redo, again, if granted permission.

Sorry if I came off harsh at any time, it wasn't my intention.