Washington and Oregon coastlines (3 shots)

What do people think of #1 in particular? It's one of my favorites, yet people seem to like it the least out of all my photographs. It's really making me second guess my ability to gauge interest in photos, based on my own perception.

What do you NOT like about it? Any comments would be very welcome and helpful. I seem to have a good success rate, but this one photo just fell flat on its face.

Conversely, I think #3 is very weak and almost went into the delete folder, yet TONS of people love it. I processed it just because I was bored at the time. It looks pretty, but I don't get that feeling of being pulled into the shot. It feels very 2D to me.

Thanks for looking!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Even before I read what you wrote I wasn't too fond of #1. Mostly because it seems like it's trying to be misty, but it's not. It looks washed out like it's missing a lot of contrast. However, #3 has a lot of contrast and I do like it better. The blown out sky in #3 is too much though.

#3 is a unique type of image. It is almost 3D when viewing it, and looks like it could have been photoshoped in putting all the parts together.
It is different, and I believe that is why people do not love it. It is hard to understand that image due to what I mentioned.

goldboughtrue wrote in post #14203638
Even before I read what you wrote I wasn't too fond of #1. Mostly because it seems like it's trying to be misty, but it's not. It looks washed out like it's missing a lot of contrast. However, #3 has a lot of contrast and I do like it better. The blown out sky in #3 is too much though.

Thanks for your input!

#3 The sky was actually not very good, and one reason why I don't like it much. Cool looking clouds, but the rest is just bland and meh...
Unfortunately, that was the best shot I could find that day. I tried blending the blown out sky with a bracketed shot, but it looked a little TOO artificial and digital.

#1 That morning had some very strange light and mist. Maybe I need to try this one yet again. My gut still tells me that the faded look suits this shot the best. There is an large amount of detail in those rocks when viewed at full resolution. All of that is lost and bland at small resolution.

I'm with you. I really like #1 and I can't not look at it. In fact I keep going back to it and... I still come up with...I don't know...but I keep looking at it...messin with my head man!

I do wish that the front right rock were sharper though like the front left rock.

The other two, you hit it on the head. Ok.

Now excuse me while I go look at #1 again.

950 wrote in post #14203888
I'm with you. I really like #1 and I can't not look at it. In fact I keep going back to it and... I still come up with...I don't know...but I keep looking at it...messin with my head man!

I do wish that the front right rock were sharper though like the front left rock.

The other two, you hit it on the head. Ok.

Now excuse me while I go look at #1 again.

I am the same way. #1 just keeps me locked into it. One of my goals was to draw the attention to the left rock. It has a very distinct "tribal" face and I wanted it to hold the most weight. The image has a lot of depth and detail when viewed at full resolution. I plan on printing it at 30x45inches or larger.