Fall Foliage

One of my first attempts at fall foliage. For the next couple of weeks mother nature should be putting on one heck of a show and I plan to take full advantage!!

C&C Very welcome. Any suggestions to improve photo or PP also very welcome!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …thwoods_photo/8​021954571/

What a wonderful view. The image looks a tad overexposed to me, but it may be my monitor. I would try to increase contrast to bring out some of the colors and texture in the trees.

Lovely shot though.

I do not care for the photo as is.

As a journalistic piece or illustration it seems like it could be wider, or even panoramic to give a sense of the environment and scale.

As an art piece, it lacks contrast, and any form of thoughtful composition. It sort of feels like a hand full of tree have been thrown in my face with out context. I cant see the forrest through the trees as it were Another way to think about it, is there is no area of focus for the eyes to travel to or focus on. As a result viewing the photos feels haphazard.

Will try bumping contrast.

Steven, I understand what you mean by no clear subject. I knew that was an potential issue when I took the image but hoped the color in the trees against the color of the corn might have been enough. I suppose if the colors had been sharper they may have stood better on their own as a subject.

Thanks to both for taking the time to reply.

I like, a little over exposed

You might try a CPL to make the sky a deeper blue. And what Steven said about a subject ... maybe you could find this type of backdrop to an old barn or something. Keep shooting.
cmh

If it's fall colors you're after you could make that foreground tree the subject and crop in to the background trees - forget the sky.

It doesn't do a whole lot for me. There's no clearly defined subject. Something to lead the eye into the image might help. Plus this doesn't scream "fall foliage". I don't think a CPL would help here. There's already a gradient in the blue sky and a CPL would make it worse. If you go back, I suggest getting closer to the hill and shooting more details. Leave the sky out and possibly use a CPL (especially if the leaves are wet). Look for back light through the colorful leaves. Shoot when the sun is low.

I agree with Qbx--this is just a quick change I did with IrfanView (don't have access to my home computer with Photoshop at the moment). Cropped it much tighter, increased the saturation and contrast a bit, and decreased the brightness a hair.

Thanks everyone for the feedback. I will be out again later today and may go back past that area. This shot was taken almost two weeks ago so the foliage might be further along but I am afraid the corn will likely be gone. At that point I would be left with a field of corn stuble and not much of a shot at all.

A question: With really vivid color would it be safe to assume the side of a mountain could stand on its own as "the" subject?

Northwoods Bill wrote in post #15040569
A question: With really vivid color would it be safe to assume the side of a mountain could stand on its own as "the" subject?

Yes it certainly can. But in my opinion the entire hill with the sky is more along the lines of a snapshot. The crop that RandMan did is better IMO. Look for compositions within the hill. He used the contrast between the hill and the field with the rule of thirds to make it more pleasing the the eye (again...my opinion).

That is what I am looking for is opinions.

I really hope that corn is still there. If not then I will look for what else i can see.

I live in what I consider to be one of the most beautiful parts of the country, we have truly amazing falls. I am anxious to get out there and try to do it justice. Also, winters can be pretty long so if I wind up with a bit of a glut of really quality images waiting for PP I would not be unhappy.

Northwoods Bill wrote in post #15040569
A question: With really vivid color would it be safe to assume the side of a mountain could stand on its own as "the" subject?

I am going to have to say not really. The reason is that if you fill the frame with the mountain side, you'll end up with a very cluttered and "chaotic" picture. Sometimes in your mind you envision all the different colors and think, "wow, I really want to showcase those colors!" but then the picture does not have a clear focal point. It would be like taking a picture of a person and having the background be as sharp and in focus as the person--then you look at it and it feels straining on your eyes because there is so much going on. It turns into kind of a mish-mash of different colors and shapes and everything.

One more analogy: I'm a professional chef instructor by trade, so picture two identical, white 14" dinner plates next to one another.
One chef plates an entree on one of the plates with the food kind of layed out flat in sections next to one another, and virtually fills the entire plate with food.
The second chef works at a high end restaurant, and places their food on the second plate in a nice, tight area in the middle of the plate, possibly stacking a few things here and there. A large amount of empty space remains on the plate that is not covered with food.
The first plate, no matter how delicious the food is on it, does not wow you with visuals. The second plate, however, will be way more visually compelling.

You smell the meat I'm roastin?

Interesting, two completely different takes. Randman, I do understand what you are saying. In the crop you did this morning the corn and the tree draw you in so presumably that would be better than just a hill full of color. One more hour until I am out of here and seeing what I can come up.

Edit: Found an awesome spot. Got some shots tonight, plan to go back Friday morning. Will post soon.