Brutal Friday Critique - are you ready? Well punk are you?

I'm far from an experienced landscape shooter, but let's see what the experts think. I didn't tweek anything else, just the crop and rotate.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19450479
I'm far from an experienced landscape shooter, but let's see what the experts think. I didn't tweek anything else, just the crop and rotate.

Hosted photo: posted by CyberDyneSystems in
./showthread.php?p=194​50479&i=i23947469
forum: Critique Corner

I have two screens so I was able to view both side by side, I deffinatly see the improvement the crop revealed, also helped me see why Anton called it, "out of balance", which mine is. Thank you for taking time to help me.
Harry

So I went back to the bridge this morning to try ChuckMiller's suggestion, "mild oncoming angle". However the fog was twice as thick which left the bridge out of sight. So I stood on the boat ramp in front of the stairs just out of sight on the original image I posted and shot the stairs, once I got home I used that shot, and one from the other day just before the sun did its magic and this is the result. I'm sure you can tell but to be honest with everyone it is two images combined in PS. What I would like critiqued is the composition, this shot is possible without PS depending on the weather.
I'm sure the first problem mentioned will be, not enough foreground at the bottom of the stairs, I should have back away from the stairs.

Thank you,
Harry

harryv wrote in post #19451181
So I went back to the bridge this morning to try ChuckMiller's suggestion, "mild oncoming angle". However the fog was twice as thick which left the bridge out of sight. So I stood on the boat ramp in front of the stairs just out of sight on the original image I posted and shot the stairs, once I got home I used that shot, and one from the other day just before the sun did its magic and this is the result. I'm sure you can tell but to be honest with everyone it is two images combined in PS. What I would like critiqued is the composition, this shot is possible without PS depending on the weather.
I'm sure the first problem mentioned will be, not enough foreground at the bottom of the stairs, I should have back away from the stairs.

Thank you,
Harry

Hosted photo: posted by harryv in
./showthread.php?p=194​51181&i=i148865124
forum: Critique Corner

Hmm, I see subject conflict here. What is the subject? What is the story? Is it primarily about a bridge, about the stairs, or about a tree?

Can you answer the question about the subject and the message of the photo?

I'm thinking the bridge is the most interesting of the three, but the stairs are in your face, and the bridge is a bit of an afterthought at the back.

Come back on a suitable day and put a model on the stairs. The stairs will serve as a nice frame and add nice texture. The model can be a pretty girl, an old grizzly guy, an amorous couple, whatever you like. Move in to eliminate distractions. Bring an off-camera flash or reflector to get the light just right.

Or explore angles of the bridge making it the main subject.

Archibald wrote in post #19451183
Hmm, I see subject conflict here. What is the subject? What is the story? Is it primarily about a bridge, about the stairs, or about a tree?

Can you answer the question about the subject and the message of the photo?

I'm thinking the bridge is the most interesting of the three, but the stairs are in your face, and the bridge is a bit of an afterthought at the back.

Come back on a suitable day and put a model on the stairs. The stairs will serve as a nice frame and add nice texture. The model can be a pretty girl, an old grizzly guy, an amorous couple, whatever you like. Move in to eliminate distractions. Bring an off-camera flash or reflector to get the light just right.

Or explore angles of the bridge making it the main subject.

Thanks Archibald, I guess I should’ve thought about that before posting, no real way to have composition without a defined subject.
Harry

harryv wrote in post #19451390
Thanks Archibald, I guess I should’ve thought about that before posting, no real way to have composition without a defined subject.
Harry

No worries, Harry. They were just my opinions. Others will have different ideas. Seriously, you can have 6 photographers in the same place, and each of them will come up with quite different images.

harryv wrote in post #19449479
Please take a look at this shot, the only thing I know about landscape photography is, there's a rule of thirds that can be broken, I think.

Hosted photo: posted by harryv in
./showthread.php?p=194​49479&i=i42623525
forum: Critique Corner

Love this one Harry. Great capture!

100% agree with Arch on this one.

stathunter wrote in post #19452246
Love this one Harry. Great capture!

Thank you, I appreciate your comment.
Harry

I know it's not Friday but I'd like to see this thread keep moving. Thoughts on this one?

harryv wrote in post #19458714
I know it's not Friday but I'd like to see this thread keep moving. Thoughts on this one?

Hosted photo: posted by harryv in
./showthread.php?p=194​58714&i=i248418778
forum: Critique Corner

I like it, very ethereal appearance. I like the shadows from the tree branches that help make beams.
If that is your car, I'd have parked it elsewhere. It doesn't look like it belongs there.

Very nice, Harry. You captured some wonderful light in the sky. Like Capn_Jack said, I find the car to be unnecessary. It draws the eye. What is that rule? ... the eye goes to the brightest part of the image. In this case it is also drawn to the car, which is very dark. I think it's because it is such a recognizable shape. So, rules don't always mean much. I like the shelters/pavilions. They are distributed nicely along the horizon.

I do yearn for more real black in the image. Look at the histogram. It does not go anywhere close to black. I don't know if we need to see detail in the black band, but a little might help the eye in that dark strip.

The trees have intriguing shapes. I'm not sure I would have cut the one on the left in half. There are probably ways to achieve better balance with the trees. They are a really important part of the composition.

I did some editing of the photo - hope you don't mind. Darkened the shadows, found a tree on the right hand side and tried to bring that out a bit, and removed the car. I played around with the tree on the left but in the end left it as it was. I think I would rather have more of it than remove it. There is very little detail in the dark band. There is probably more in the raw file.

Thank you both, The man and the car were both a surprise, I don't know how but I never saw them when I took the image, I was going back and forth between this image and a bridge just east of my position, so I have a few shots without the car and man. the fog was ever changing and I was experimenting with different exposures. I don't mind at all Archibald, every bit of help is much appreciated. I had a hard time trying to crop this image, so I left it as shot and told my self that next time I need to pay more attention to what's in the view finder. Here is the pre-processed image. Thank you both again,
Harry

harryv wrote in post #19458759
Thank you both, The man and the car were both a surprise, I don't know how but I never saw them when I took the image, I was going back and forth between this image and a bridge just east of my position, so I have a few shots without the car and man. the fog was ever changing and I was experimenting with different exposures. I don't mind at all Archibald, every bit of help is much appreciated. I had a hard time trying to crop this image, so I left it as shot and told my self that next time I need to pay more attention to what's in the view finder. Here is the pre-processed image. Thank you both again,
Harry

Hosted photo: posted by harryv in
./showthread.php?p=194​58759&i=i118503624
forum: Critique Corner

Wow, you did a fantastic job on post-processing that image. Good work.