|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 23, 2008 22:50:36 GMT -5
Straight across the bay from the split tone is granite. I wonder about this one - it is what I saw, but, is it too dark? Does the light spot save it?  |
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Feb 23, 2008 23:19:15 GMT -5
I don't think it's too dark. Very nice.
To the right of the right-hand tree, there's something vertical and then a kind of smoky line connecting it to the shrubbery. The smoky line's distracting. Would cloning it out be contrary to your principles?
Being shameless, I'd up the saturation.
|
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 23, 2008 23:25:08 GMT -5
cloning? moi? betcherbottom.
and the saturation? you hussy!
hang on.
|
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 23, 2008 23:49:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Feb 23, 2008 23:57:26 GMT -5
I think that's even better, Sekhmet. Now just add a moon and a naked lady....  Seriously, it's a good one. |
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 23, 2008 23:59:49 GMT -5
LOL. I was thinking of a large cat on the rock. I have a rule, seriously, never photoshop in that which was not there. Always clean up nature's mess if it will make a good photo by removing stray branches and stuff. thanks flake, I think that made it much better. the value of a good critique verified. |
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Feb 24, 2008 8:53:37 GMT -5
Second one is better. Splits it apart into more of an abstraction. The enhanced color takes on an impressionist appeal. I think that helps, cause I find it otherwise pretty static and drama-less.
I guess I like drama.
|
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Feb 24, 2008 10:19:45 GMT -5
I agree with you Marshall. I guess that's why I have never worked it up before now. I think, for me, it's one of those photos that remind me of a certain place ... specifically those shores of Georgian Bay where the rock comes down to the water like that .. and that almost dark when things glow. The next night gave me the tree.  Lars loves the place - a provincial park, and he loves the print because he was there and he longs for it. |
|
