abstract photos of tree trunks in the forest - would appreciate some insightful feedback

chauncey wrote in post #18067595
Well La-De-Da, who woulda thunk it, Tom is stepping out of his comfort zone into what...artistry.

Hopefully, I am simply finding another comfort zone to add to those I already have! But truth be told, I have been shooting and experimenting with this type of imagery for several years now.

chauncey wrote in post #18067595
I'm gonna argue with your premise of not manipulating images, but then you know I'm heavy into PS.

I am not contending that the images shouldn't be manipulated via photoshop.......just that I do not want to be the one doing the manipulating.

After buying Photoshop (Elements) and fiddling around with it for a couple months, I came to realize that I actually hate the process itself. Sitting at my computer and doing things in Photoshop is actually very unpleasant and unenjoyable for me. When it comes to creative artistic pursuits, I have come to realize that if the process itself is dreadful and unenjoyable, then I probably shouldn't be doing it. So I have decided to stick to the parts of image-making that I enjoy - those pursuits that I can put my heart and my passion into.

I have found an image-editing company that will do the photoshop work for me when I do have a need for such manipulations to be done.

chauncey wrote in post #18067595
Regarding these two images...I'm not liking the color. Would rather see more of a pastel "look" and maybe rotate the images 90 degrees.

If I were to lessen the saturation, do you think that would help to move toward the pastel type of look that you prefer? Would an overall lightening of the image also help to work toward this pastel look?

chauncey wrote in post #18067595
Check this link...http://www.finearttips​.com …ing-of-color-in-your-art/

Thanks for the link!
As far as colour theory, my head has been buried in stacks of info about this very subject for the past two or three months. I am a member of a local artist's association - Okanogan County Artists - and colour theory has been a major topic during meetings and presentations these past few months. I am even developing my own colour palette for nature paintings (using acrylic paints). I don't know if I'll ever develop into much of a painter, but I do immensely enjoy mixing paints and coming up with colour combinations and palettes of colours that work well together.

chauncey wrote in post #18067595
It sounds goofy but something that wouldn't require much manipulation...take a shallow baking tin filled with water>add drops of different
colored food coloring here and there>put in freezer>shoot it when solid...see one of mine in my 1x link.

Sounds fun!

.

Bassat wrote in post #18067778
I think the image in post #8 is a huge improvement. There is just a hint that the image may actually be OF something, and still presents very little information as to what IT is. IMHO, this is more 'artistic'.

Tom,
I would really, really like the image in post #8......if all of the lines could be removed that are more horizontal than vertical. Those diagonally slanted and horizontal apparitions just ruin the whole thing for me. But as far as the colours and the arrangement of the tree trunks in the frame are concerned, I actually prefer this image to the others I posted.

Bassat wrote in post #18067778
Have you tried similar things with horizontal, mixed, or circular movements of the camera?

Oh, yes! I have thousands of images in which I've employed all types of camera movements. In addition to the horizontal, mixed, and circular movements that you mention, I have also tried zoom blur, which can produce some very interesting and different effects. And I have also done nature abstracts in which there was no camera movement at all, but in which the entire scene is very de-focused. An entire frame of nothing but bokeh - I love doing that!

.

PineBomb wrote in post #18067903
Good stuff. I especially like the item below. Can I borrow one of yours?

-Duck- wrote in post #18067796

• Try throwing your camera up while the shutter is open (not for the faint of heart).
  

When I teach beginners one of the first exercises I do with them is have them toss their cameras into the air. Albeit they don't go too high, but the exercise is designed to make them think of the camera as a tool not as some fragile instrument.

I had my 6D tumble a good 100 feet down a rocky slope. Everyone around me freaked. I casually walked over, picked it up and continued shooting. I learned a long time ago these things are tougher than we give them credit for.

-Duck- wrote in post #18067796
Tom, with these images you are stepping out of the realm of photographer into the realm of painter (something I know a bit about).

For the past few months, I, too, have been painting......but I still don't know anything about it

-Duck- wrote in post #18067796
The camera is a tool, much like a paintbrush is to the artist. With abstract painting it is not a simple matter of throwing paint on a canvas and calling it art. There is technique involved. There is theory involved. There is purpose involved, even if the pundits fail to recognize that. The goal is to create something that evokes emotion.

In your case you need to do a lot of experimentation to discover what works and what doesn't. This, however, is both the challenge and the fun of it.

All so very true. I have actually experimented quite a bit with this type of imagery. Probably taken 4 or 5 thousand captures just to get a handful that resemble my intentions. And I do have very clearly defined intentions for this type of image. I pretty much know just what I want to create - what I want the images to look like - but actually getting them to look exactly the way I want is quite difficult.

I think that to some extent, my subject matter presents some challenges that make it difficult to transform it into what I want it to look like on the sensor. I like these images to be very neat and tidy, with a precise organization to the elements on the frame. Yet the forests themselves are messy, with stray branches everywhere and rocks interrupting the lush vegetation on the forest floor and gaps in the trees that are a little too large for my tastes and tree trunks that don't look like the others around them and a few dead herbaceous plants within the mass of otherwise lush, living herbaceous plants and on and on and on. Yet I am a nature photographer, and it is my intention to photograph things in nature as I find them, and not to go around manipulating nature by pruning branches and pulling weeds and so forth. So I am trying to develop a technique that will allow me to photograph very messy scenes with lots of distractions, and yet somehow have these scenes be recorded onto my sensor in a way that makes them look neat and precise and clean, without any spots of anything that doesn't fit the aesthetic that I am going for.


.

Wow, sounds like you've set a pretty high goal for yourself. Best of luck to you. Looking forward to seeing what you post.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18068203
I like these images to be very neat and tidy, with a precise organization to the elements on the frame. Yet the forests themselves are messy, with stray branches everywhere and rocks interrupting the lush vegetation on the forest floor and gaps in the trees that are a little too large for my tastes and tree trunks that don't look like the others around them and a few dead herbaceous plants within the mass of otherwise lush, living herbaceous plants and on and on and on.

Does your material have to be trees? If you take a lower POV, a meadow with closely spaced tall grasses and perhaps flowers might serve. Because I'm used to California's flora, I'm thinking of hillsides with lupine and poppies, for starters.

OhLook wrote in post #18068262
Does your material have to be trees? If you take a lower POV, a meadow with closely spaced tall grasses and perhaps flowers might serve. Because I'm used to California's flora, I'm thinking of hillsides with lupine and poppies, for starters.

Funny you mention Lupine. I was just shooting experimental stuff with a Lupine patch last week. The Lupine is still in full bloom around here at elevations of over 6,000 feet. I didn't really like much of anything from that shoot, but I'll share one here anyway. Here's a zoom blur photo from that day. Lots and lots of room for improvement:

I have been trying vertical sweeps. I do not have experience marketing these. I like the images that are abstract but still refer visually to trees or what ever I have used as the source image.

In your first image I think dark blue is in the wrong place. I struggle with images with a composition that fails. I think the first one should be more abstract or more realistic.

The second image might be improved by cropping some of the bottom brown. The right side has many vertical lines that don't go all the way up. I think that weakens the composition because it is so unlike the left 2/3. The colors may undermine the image also.

You know your market but I want to reinforce the advice to capture many like images until you have confidence that you are putting forth the best images. I don't think two are.

Dutch

I like the second image best. I do like this sort of thing as a change of pace in general. I like the darker colors, you have a couple of lines in the center (trees), and then falling off a bit to the edges, I tend to like symmetry, and even in this abstract photo there is symmetry.

I tried the same thing myself with some aspens about a month ago - after staring at the images for a week or two I deleted them, just didn't quite work, you did a better job here than I did.

What about panning the camera sideways?

In a circling motion?

I keep reading the camera movement suggestions that you guys refer to...they can all be accomplished in PS.
I gotta be honest, when your goal is "ART"...why the aversion to PS?

.

chauncey wrote in post #18069517
I gotta be honest, when your goal is "ART"...why the aversion to PS?

I explained this in detail in the long, point-by-point post that I wrote specifically to you, Chauncey. I spent about a half hour responding to your post alone.

Did you not read that post?

.

Yeah, I had read it...just don't understand. Takes all kinds I guess...

.

chauncey wrote in post #18069576
Yeah, I had read it...just don't understand. Takes all kinds I guess...

You don't understand someone not wanting to do something that they absolutely hate doing; something that they dread; something that is extremely unpleasant?

Personally, I think that artistic expression at some level requires that the artist be inspired and feeling positive about the creative process itself. If the actual act of creating the art is really distasteful to the artist, then that will definitely affect the art itself - usually in a detrimental way.

In my post I addressed all of the points you had made in a thoughtful, honest manner. I really was hoping that that would lead to some lengthy, insightful, and productive discussions between us here in this thread. I had replied to your statement bout the colors and asked you a couple of questions, and was/am looking forward to having you answer those questions with whatever insights you have about pastels.

I think that the real value of a forum such as this one is realized when there is detailed, explanatory discourse being carried on. When someone just steps in, makes a point or two, and then steps away, it doesn't really help anybody to understand anything any better. Please, Chauncey, don't be "that guy" who makes a point and then doesn't hang around to discuss the matter further.

.

chauncey wrote in post #18069517
I keep reading the camera movement suggestions that you guys refer to...they can all be accomplished in PS.

wrong.