Rain of trees

I am sorry to say that the visual interest of this shot is not quite there. It strikes me as a pre-shot. That is, you spy a subject and you take a few test shots from different perspectives and distances until something jumps out at you. The shot that jumps out at you should be the one you post for reactions.

For example, patterns in the drops. You've got five across the middle that are more or less in focus. But there's a big one right in front of them. And it's out of focus. The pattern is just not that gripping. Reconsider your use of the narrow depth of field.

The tree images could be interesting. But it's only apparent in the five that are in focus. Again, the narrow depth of field deprives you of other possibilities. Consider getting in closer to get more detail on the tree image. Consider color, which would separate the trees from the drops.

I recommend not stripping the metadata. There's often useful information that can help make a point in a critique.

joedlh wrote in post #13609720
I am sorry to say that the visual interest of this shot is not quite there. It strikes me as a pre-shot. That is, you spy a subject and you take a few test shots from different perspectives and distances until something jumps out at you. The shot that jumps out at you should be the one you post for reactions.

For example, patterns in the drops. You've got five across the middle that are more or less in focus. But there's a big one right in front of them. And it's out of focus. The pattern is just not that gripping. Reconsider your use of the narrow depth of field.

The tree images could be interesting. But it's only apparent in the five that are in focus. Again, the narrow depth of field deprives you of other possibilities. Consider getting in closer to get more detail on the tree image. Consider color, which would separate the trees from the drops.

I recommend not stripping the metadata. There's often useful information that can help make a point in a critique.

Thanks, and I don't strip the metadata, save as .png in Photoshop - not sure how to include it.

Thanks for the critique, this is the one that jumped out at me, but that's why I'm looking for critique

I really like the photo but joedlh made some fair point's, the ingredients were there to make this cool shot an amazing shot.

I like it, it's an interesting photo. Try cropping in closer to the drops that have the best reflections (3 in the center). They are too small in this version to really see what's in them.

Thanks for the repies!

EXIF:

Canon 30D
ISO 400
EXP 1/800 s
Flash did not fire
Canon 28-135
Focal Length 135mm
Aperature 5.6

What it also doesn't say is that I used an EF 25 II Extension tube as well.

ktc1 wrote in post #13610165
I like it, it's an interesting photo. Try cropping in closer to the drops that have the best reflections (3 in the center). They are too small in this version to really see what's in them.

Thanks, I might try this tonight and post up the re-crop in this thread...

I actually really like this shot! How did you get it?

toastyphoto wrote in post #13611523
I actually really like this shot! How did you get it?

Thanks, although I am going to do a little more wok on it as stated above.

See my EXIF data, and the source was rain on my car's windshield.

Quite honestly, I like the first one better... the second one just seems *too* close... but that's just my opinion. Either way, I definitely dig the idea.

Randi wrote in post #13612627
Quite honestly, I like the first one better... the second one just seems *too* close... but that's just my opinion. Either way, I definitely dig the idea.

Thanks, I'm liking the second one better myself

Bump for second attempt

An improvement, but it looks a little unbalanced. The big drop in front really draws the eye. But you cut off part of it. The out of focus space in the top part does not contribute to the image. Try cropping so that everything moves up a bit.

I like the first one far more....second one is too tightly cropped. Do you have a color version?