Dangling Tree Banches

My latest for this forum.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Nice, would probably sell well.

ChunkyDA wrote in post #15889006
Nice, would probably sell well.

Seriously?

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #15889068
Seriously?

Probably not.

Dave, I assume sarcasm but thats not what this forum is for. the OP wants critique

Christian, couple of points
- No real central main subject so quite bland
- Secondly, your watermark is way too big and obtrusive
- Even if you have a main subject, lighting is ordinary, flat and obviously a cloudy sky

^ Agree with Paul, although I see what you were attempting to capture. Perhaps another perspective could work, but straight on...not for me anyways.

Another watermark with leaves behind...seriously, if you want a photo critiqued, why make it worse with such a distraction?
I have to agree with the 2 comments above but I like the concept.

and here i was thinking it was pretty but a bit overexposed....

Sorry, just looks like a snapshot of a watermark.

Watermark aside, I really like it. I'd crop out the last hanging bit on the right, and then see about maybe the clump of them on the left. Could use a little more contrast or something, too. But I do like it, and I don't really think ChunkDA's comment was sarcastic. It may not sell, but it's a nice photo.

Tough crowd^^^

I personally think the idea is good, but execution a bit off. My next attempt would include leaving more dead space at the bottom (maybe 1/3rd or slightly less of the photo height), and doing something to have a better exposed background. Maybe you could do an HDR type image with a few exposures, or maybe expose for the background on a sunny day with bright blue sky, and let the leaves become silhouettes. Just my $0.02

Thanks for the responses, guys. It isn't my best work, but I thought it was interesting, and wanted to hear the gallery's thoughts.

Yeah, I didn't quite know what to do with it. I was more-or-less walking around and thought that that was too neat to not take a picture. I'd have spent way more time had I really, really wanted to use the branches as a "feature photo". I'd definitely say the execution is off.

The photo does, however, has potential. I wouldn't not use it with some more modifications. As we've read here, some people are really high on it, and others aren't. It seems to come down to execution.

And who cares about the watermark? I'm not printing a 20 x 30 of this with it intact. It's for online security/marketing only.

A very interesting tree regardless.

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #15892037
And who cares about the watermark? I'm not printing a 20 x 30 of this with it intact. It's for online security/marketing only.

Ditto. A couple months ago I decided to Google Image Search a bunch of my Flickr images...8 of them were being used without permission with my small watermark either cropped or photo-shopped out of the image. Makes me think twice about posting anything without a large watermark...and I try to avoid the large watermark because I feel like some may think I'm being conceited that somebody may actually want to steal my image.

Mine is rather large, but it's fairly classy and isn't flamboyant. Again, we're not sticking it on prints.

With a large watermark, it has potential as a logo for a business.
Assuming no watermark (you can't see past it to offer an opinion? Silly.), it's nice- the background is pleasingly blurred, and I CAN see it selling. I'd also like to see more versions of similar photos from you, nphsbuckeye.

i am one of those who like it too.

it looks like it is raining willow.

watermarks used to drive me nuts, but i am getting used to..looking 'around' them so to speak.