what do you mean that isn't a panorama?

Is this art of art sake?? I don't get it!!

Rule of thirds...don't center your horizons.

rules are meant to be broken

Bigbitt8706 wrote in post #5628382
rules are meant to be broken

but that dosent make it good

too much negative space

Bigbitt8706 wrote in post #5628382
rules are meant to be broken

Sure, when you're Ansel Adams, then you can break them. Until then...

how do you think Ansel Adams became Ansel Adams? before someone points out how big of an A-hole i am, i'm not making a comparison. i'm just saying, if you find something you like, who the hell cares about 'rules?'

dman726749 wrote in post #5628406
but that dosent make it good

too much negative space

the whole thing is negative space, if you think about it, so i guess that means your right

I think it'd look nice if your subject actually stood out. Even explicitly making it "stand out" it still doesn't. The tree/bush/? is too small in comparison to the field. If your subject was more well defined - larger, less cluttered - I think I'd like the image. Otherwise, your extra space it just way too much considering your tiny focal point.

Bigbitt8706 wrote in post #5628453
...before someone points out how big of an A-hole i am...

Hey you big A-hole ....I like the symmetry, its "artsy".

Too funny (your responses), we really gotta hang out some time.

I love it.

I do like the idea behind it and the originality, I don't like the same amount of white and black space on either side (top and bottom).. a little less of either one or the other would work better for me.

I also do agree that rules are meant to be broken in certain situations (if one has a good understanding of the rules), I've done it myself...some of the photo's people love some they don't. Art is in the eye of the beholder.

I also like the originality and minimalism of this. To me it's more of an "attractive pattern" than a photograph. I experimented with scrolling up and down to cut off sections of white and black, and for me it works best with the horizon dead centre. The rule of thirds and others are only guides. There are times when a photo works better if the rules aren't used. Whether these rules should be used or not in my view depends on the subject matter, not the skill level of the photographer. They might not always get it right but it's quite possible for an amateur to recognise when the rules should be broken. I don't see this as a photo of a bush on the horizon, more an interesting bit of abstract art.

I can see what you went for here but it is totally bland. There is nothing that makes it interesting because your eyes look for some and doesn't see it in your picture.

Yes rules are meant to be broken but you cannot break a rule if you do not understand it. One thing I would have done is defined your picture a bit more when posting on a forum so add some sort of border and try a different composition.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

elysium wrote in post #5630265
I can see what you went for here but it is totally bland. There is nothing that makes it interesting because your eyes look for some and doesn't see it in your picture.

Yes rules are meant to be broken but you cannot break a rule if you do not understand it. One thing I would have done is defined your picture a bit more when posting on a forum so add some sort of border and try a different composition.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Yes this is what I meant , I really do like this a lot actually. It's not bland at all, honestly I think it's borderline brilliant.

Many mainstream Photographers make awful art critiques, art photography is really a differen't genre.

I think you did a great job and should be encouraged. I also like your attitude to challenge, complimented by a sense to reason, will bring you to great places