daan t'beck

Post by **Charles Twist** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:29 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Hello all,
I got myself out to May Beck yesterday to get the nice autumn colours and would appreciate comments on the pic below. I can't work out whether there is too little or too much happening, or if the structure is not forceful enough. Any comments welcome. Thanks,
Charles

Post by **masch** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:13 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Charles,

great colours, but the watermark is really distracting...

Marc

Dave Parkin · Post by **Dave Parkin** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:32 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

To my eye the colours and tones are very good, autumn really is the best time of the year. I do however find the light branches on the far side of the river distracting particularly the one on the right hand side. Apart from a chain saw not sure what you could have done about it

Not sure I should be commenting as I have not published any of my pictures yet. Problems with still being in the dark ages

dave

gari · Post by **gari** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:29 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Hi Charles, I really like the image, strong foreground, nice colors with a limited palette, I am not overkeen on pics with lots going on colorwise.

I feel that the composition is quite well balanced, the water provides a nice element of dynamism. I actually like the trees, I find that the hilight helps to lift the background and carry the depth a little.

Gotta agree with the watermark comment mind, distracting.

Gari

George Hart · Post by **George Hart** » Sun Nov 19, 2006 4:19 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Charles: Critiques are so personal that you must forgive me for even having the temerity to reply, but for me the biggest problem with this pic is the great big boulder in the foreground. The leaves on top of it are worthy specimens that draw attention, but there is nothing that connects them with the background to make an integrated pic. Sorry, but I'd bin this one and try again—the colours are still about, round here anyway!

Post by **Charles Twist** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 7:43 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Thanks for all your comments.
The bright trees behind: I found both your comments interesting and will bear both in mind - three-dimensionality vs distraction. I actually put a good bit of effort into reducing the impact of that tree on the right, but my analysis was nowhere near as explicit as yours.
George: thank you for your audacity - your comments are always welcome. I guess you wouldn't have taken that picture? What you say relates back to the question of narrative. What does my picture say about what or whom? In the sense that all the elements of the composition were in the same locale, they are related to each other and thus form a whole. In the pictorial sense, I agree that the structure is not obvious, hence my opening question. I must argue against your point though: the colour of the foreground leaves is linked to the spread of coloured leaves in the mid-ground and relates symbolically to the trees seen in the background. The additional elements are the stream and the boulder, which provide context. The question you raise is reportage versus graphic symbolism, and in a way Colin Prior versus David Ward. They both have their merits.
Re the waterwark: (i) I like it (ii) most people can see beyond it (iii) it provides a modicum of safety. On this last point, I want for proof an email exchange with a friend who wanted to illutstrate their Rambler's report in the regional press with one of my pictures. My friend says: "only XXXX's piece on the Brecon Beacons has been done in colour - a rather stunning view of one of the Fans (which he got off the internet!)". Personally I call that theft and if I saw my picture printed without my consent, I would contact the paper and ask for an explanation. The reprint size is small and the picture I finally submitted is little bigger than the one posted here.
Thanks again.
Charles

George Hart · Post by **George Hart** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:37 pm Etc/GMT-1+01:00

Charles: Of course you may be right, and I have found that sharpening up the pic (shift+R) makes the profile of the stream connect with the shape of the boulder, so that the parts of the pic join together rather better. I suspect that this image may be best evaluated after being drum-scanned and printed at 20x16 in. But that's a world apart from an image of a few square inches on a computer screen, and I still think that the trees look like a few twigs stuck in the ground, rather than being a strong part of the whole grouping.