[Falke]

Hi there
I am seeking critique on the following two shots:

13 s exposure:


and this one at 0.5 s - single shot - no blend



Edit 2: I was just having a spin out when I looked at the 2nd shot and noticed for the first time how freakishly the clouds almost mirror some of the rocks in front of it (nothing shopped - I swear). Even the little flat cloud on the horizon to the right of the sun has a rock below...

Thanks in advance, Falke

edit don't be shy folks I just wonder whether some find it too dark, too golden, too much vignette, too saturated, too unsharp (which places ?). Does either elicit an emotion?

---

Last edited by Falke; 12-16-2011 at 06:00 PM.

[Bruce Clark]

#1 seems a bit soft in the lower corners, more so on the right hand side. Overall I find it dark especially around the rocks. Not sure where the attention is meant to be as there is no real point of interest.
#2 is brilliant. Well spotted. The eye is drawn from the bright patch in the foregound to the sun and the reflections in the water and the clouds and the rocks.Plenty to look at.

[Falke]

It is a poor day when I do not learn something new.

Thank you Bruce, that is exactly the kind of critique I am looking for. And I like your quote.

[Mychael]

The first shot is a little dark but personally I find Fg interest in the sand and rocks just barely under the water and I can look Right through the image to the horizon.
The 2nd shot is much more dramatic and feels very complete to me, I'd not change anything with it.

---

Last edited by Mychael; 12-17-2011 at 01:56 AM.

[Falke]

I find Fg interest in the sand and rocks just barely under the water

Thanks Mychael, I think I might try to light up that Fg. like you say and how Bruce mentioned above that the emphasis, or the foreground is missing. Lighting up the foreground will be a great improvement.

And the second pic, thanks for that encouraging comment.

edit:

first pic slightly changed:

[Macario]

the first pic I do not like that much, seems a bit odd for me. But I have to agree, the second one is spot on

[DanielT74]

I like both shots and while the 2nd one obviously works better, I think there is a something to the first one too. That rock on the left and the small rocks leading to it are very atmospheric. I would probably crop it from the bottom just below the two smallish rocks in the centre and it would be nice if the sky was a bit smoother to bring out the interesting rocks more...

---

Last edited by DanielT74; 01-04-2012 at 01:36 AM.

[Bruce]

With the first one my eye is drawn to the foreground and there is not enough to draw me deeper into the photograph. The second one, well different story, nice balance of colour, light, composition (horizon at 2/3rds). The light draws my eye from the foreground into the image. Well done IMO.

[Falke]

Thanks for the comments guys.

Macario, it is interesting how you and most people like the second shot better. I kind of like the other one too as it is less busy. But the light situation, I agree is better in the second shot.

DanielT74, I like the crop that you are suggesting. It would make it a different better pic altogether.

Bruce, I think you are right with the first one, how there is not enough light to draw your eye from the foreground to the background.

While I am at it I would also like to show a pic or two which I took at another time at the same location:



and from the same time:



the latter two pics were done without the grad ND filters by blending two exposures for each shot. High tide seems to be better for a less busy look. I also decided that I not going back to this site other than during winter when the sun rises much more to the left, and the leading lines are more in the direction of the sun.

[Macario]

I like both shots, but prefere the first one

[OrangeKx]

That 2nd shot is money.

[Falke]

Thanks again for the comments.