South Plaza Landscape II

[Arthur Morris]

Since you all liked the color of the vegetation on South Plaza I thought that I would run this rather out of the box landscape by y'all. It does have a recognizable bush :)

This image was created with the tripod-mounted (Gitzo 3530 LS with the Mongoose M3.5) Canon 800mm f/5.6L IS lens with the EOS-1D MIV. ISO 500. Evaluative metering +1 stop: 1/15 sec. at f/25 in Tv Mode.

I simply panned the lens while making the exposure. I varied my panning rates and tried to get the green bush in the upper right third. (I succeeded admirably here.) I should have gone down to ISO 50; doing so would have reduced dust spot clean-up time considerably.

Don't be shy; all comments welcome.

ps: I will be posting a pure pattern image from this series in OOTB in a few.

[Arthur Morris]

ps: a small strip of white lower center was cloned out. It was probably a Swallow-tailed Gull....

[Dave Mills]

Hi Artie,Excellent subject for a blur which was handled well. The soft bands of color are pleasing leading the eye to the bush which is acting as an anchor point.
I would remove the band of blue,while an appealing color it takes some of the focus away from the colored pattern and bush...

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks Dave. I couldn't disagree more strongly about the strip of water however: for me it makes the image. Eliminating by cropping would totally upset the compositional balance but more than that, it frames the image nicely, sets the scene, and adds a nice diagonal.

Respectfully.

[Jim Fenton]

Artie...

I like it a lot and I think the panning was at a perfect speed.

Colors are pissa.

I like the blue on the top, but the creek within takes away from the image a bit...but that's simply personal preference.

[Arthur Morris]

What creek?

[Jackie Schuknecht]

I have looked at this earlier w/o the water, and I thought without it it could be anything. A wall with lichen on it. I think the water is a reference point and anchors the image IMO. (My .02):) Also the bush helps to give a focus point it and more visual interest.

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Jackie, Thanks, and thanks for following the link from OOTB :)

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Artie,
For those of you who like the blue up top.....why? I know that abstracts/blurs are a personal thing....but if you had a bird....with a unifom/pleasing BG....and a band up top......99% sure the band would be a crop out. IMO.....Dave is correct as it draws the eye from the rest of the scene. I have no idea what it is....just a small sliver of color.....brightest at that....and it draws the eye from the rest of the scene. My suggestion is for a rotation...a couple of degrees CW to make the base of the tree flat....and also minimize/eliminate the top. Frames aren't only on one side...when they are....they unbalance an image.

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Roman, Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this one. We will however, as you might have guessed, need to agree to disagree on this one. Strongly :) And, just for the record books, I often like a strip of color at the top or the bottom of my avian images, even when they feature backgrounds of otherwise pure color.

You are right about leveling the base of the tree.

[Arthur Morris]

Here it is leveled and cropped as suggested. In addition to losing the strip of blue water, the breadth of the patterns and colors have been greatly reduced by the crop that was needed after leveling the image.

I will stick with the original version :) I can be a stubborn mother....

[Arthur Morris]

And finally, here it is with the bush leveled but the strip of water included. I prefer this version to the one in Pane #11 but the original posts is still my very favorite in part because the long this triangle of water enters right from the corner of the frame.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hey Artie,
OK....rmember that I'm here to learn too;)......I want to know the reasoning/thoughts as why you feel it adds....that's all. I forgot to mention.....I really like pane #11. I has a nice flow to it and the top doesn't draw my eye....but as in many cases, abstracts and blurs have a wider latitude. I stilll want a why from you. Jackie came the closest...when she called it an anchor/refeence point......I accept that......I am always careful to warn people in landscapes to disattach themselves from the photo and place....much like you do.......then make the evaluation.
See...we disagree on which version is best.....not on liking it:).

[Arthur Morris]

In part I like the triangular strip of water in Pane #1 because it helps to set the scene: a slope next to a body of water. That said, there are lots of artistic choices that are visceral (if I am using the word correctly). Your gut tells you why A is better than B but you just cannot put it into words. That's exactly what happens to me when I attempt to explain why I like the composition of the original best of all by far :)

But I am glad that you like one version and glad that we have had an educational and civil discussion here.

[Dave Mills]

One point to consider. The average viewer will not know what the colored area represents. The bush is recognizseable but in an alien location. To some the blue strip could be sky even though you know it's water.
It is an abstract and full of interpretation. Compositionally I feel pane 11 is the strongest. It's strong,simple without 2 areas competing for attention.

[Arthur Morris]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Dave. It sure looks like water to me; I have never seen a sky with long blue streaks that look like waves. I do appreciate all the comments even if I must agree to disagree with some of them. :)

[denise ippolito]

Artie, I'd go with the image in pane #12. :) I think leveling it was the key here.

[Fabs Forns]

I generally prefer more detail in blurs. Having said that, the repost in pane #11 looks to be the best of the series for my taste.

[Arthur Morris]

I generally prefer more detail in blurs. Having said that, the repost in pane #11 looks to be the best of the series for my taste.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. As for the amount of detail here--none--I love the look and the streaked colors. And as I have stated from the begining, I much prefer the versions with the strip to those without :)

[Don Railton]

Hi guys

For the novice like me getting the chance to read the comments and thoughts of a bunch of brilliant photographers and getting the insite as to what they like and dislike over a bunch of photos is really facinating...This thread is worth heaps more than my membership. For the record Arty I dont like any of them really, generally I think a blur is something you get after you make a mistake, but I will happily concede that I may be artistically barren and this may forever more come between me and the next good photo I want to take.

One question for you Arty, do you think that the fact that you were at this site when you took the photo influences the way you review the image captured? This is something I continually struggle with when assessing something I have taken. I try and put myself in the position of a first time viewer who sees the image as just an image and not as the photographer who has some deeper connection with the time and place of capture.

with greatest respect to you all

DON

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Don,

First off, thanks a ton for your membership support.
re:

For the novice like me getting the chance to read the comments and thoughts of a bunch of brilliant photographers and getting the insite as to what they like and dislike over a bunch of photos is really facinating...This thread is worth heaps more than my membership.

:)

For the record Arty I dont like any of them really, generally I think a blur is something you get after you make a mistake, but I will happily concede that I may be artistically barren and this may forever more come between me and the next good photo I want to take.

Could very well be. I have loved blurs from the beginning. They are an acquired taste for some.

One question for you Arty, do you think that the fact that you were at this site when you took the photo influences the way you review the image captured?

No. I am pretty sure that if this were someone else's image that my reaction to it would be pretty much the same. That said, there are times when I really like an image, work on it for an hour, and then decide that I do not like it alt all and wind up scrapping my work and deleting the RAW. I do not, however, think that that every has anything to do with the location.

This is something I continually struggle with when assessing something I have taken. I try and put myself in the position of a first time viewer who sees the image as just an image and not as the photographer who has some deeper connection with the time and place of capture.
I look at the image and usually know immediately if I like it or not. Sometimes it takes one or two seconds. BTW, I still like the image in Pane 1. :)


with greatest respect to you all

DON[/QUOTE]

[Don Railton]

Thanks for the reply and being so accessable Artie...

best regards
DON