Robin, Call Home!

[HulaMike]

This was another grossly exposed beach shot done with a cheap Hoya polarizer that turns color to mud on my S2. Duh! When will I learn? The S2 hates cheap glass. Might be time for better filters! Still, kind of nice I thought and so converted to a B&W. Then a drastic crop.

Robin, this is really for you. Can you relate to the thin beach element? All that sky with a tiny main subject? Or is the sky the subject??? Just curious what you think of this one, its not a pop quiz. ;)

As always, comments appreciated from one and all.

(I edited the pic by adding a colored matte)

[Serge]

You're really bending the envelope there Brudda :D
I don't think anybody would be game now to mention that dreaded word "r...s" :lol:
I'd like to see a slither more sand at the bottom, but like the starkness of it,
and I think that viewed as a large print, the whole dynamic would be different.
It's edgy, and I like it :)

P.S. I for one like your panchent for the "anamorphic" aspect ratio, almost a perfect 2.35

[HulaMike]

a gentleman and a scholar as always.

The way the shot shows here does make the sand area seem rather insignificant Serge. When viewed normally it's more prominant and works better. Not to say it couldn't be cropped with a bit more showing. Don't know about 'bending the envelope' though, this is pretty benign for me. Now, Bjorn Roreslett's nature work is edgy! You familiar with him? Take a look at his "far side" images and his IR work. Incredible. Here's the link:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

[Major Molly]

Mike,

a fantastic image, which as Serge suggests, would look great as a large print. I am also a fan of the panoramic/letterbox crop.

[KeithM]

Dare I say, I like it - when I first viewed the image, at this size, I agreed with a bit more beach but having re-looked it gets more comfortable as it is ( if you see what I mean )...

I love the scale of the sky - big skies ( with interesting cloud ) are always a winner for me - not as the sole subject or point of interest, but also to counterpoint our small size ( against that big sky ) :)

( I think I would have tried to get away with making 'Robin' even smaller in the frame - based on the assumption that a viewer would be looking at a big print of the full res image - and so rendering 'Robin' still recognisable as a very small human being on the 'phone against a really big sky :D )

Keith.

[JPS]

Now !!!! this is a great one !!!! ...nothing to change, the sky/see/beach proportions are very good (I guess the crop did it !?!) !
I like all of it, and, like the others, I would like to see that one in 40"x60" !
:cheers:
PS. was it with the 12-24 ?

[HulaMike]

Thanks Mark, Keith & JPS.

It was the Nikkor 12-24 DX JP. Not the best example of clarity from this lens though. I had a low end polrizer on it that actually gave the image a soft film-like grain. The guy with cell phone is very sharp full size though.

PS: I edited the pic to include a colored matte that sets the white beach area better.

[Serge]

a gentleman and a scholar as always.

The way the shot shows here does make the sand area seem rather insignificant Serge. When viewed normally it's more prominant and works better. Not to say it couldn't be cropped with a bit more showing. Don't know about 'bending the envelope' though, this is pretty benign for me. Now, Bjorn Roreslett's nature work is edgy! You familiar with him? Take a look at his "far side" images and his IR work. Incredible. Here's the link:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html


I guess it was my ingrained conservatism rearing it's ugly head Mike, you were only slightly bending the "classical" rules, but I love bending them myself.
Thanks for that great link, my kind of stuff, will check it out at length.
I have a whole series of "mindscapes" on slides over the years, this guy rocks.
:cheers:

[crabby]

I'm with the rest Mike, a great piece of work! The tonality is wonderful. The person is the main subject and the surroundings tell the story. In color the person would be dwarfed by the surrounding area and it would be more confusing to read. That is unless the person is wearing opposing colors to the predominantly (im guessing) blue sky.
The frame does nothing for me. It doesn't add anything but at least it doesn't take away either. It's just neutral filler. I think a thinner solid black framing would suit me better. Or maybe just white space surrounding the image with a nice 8 ply black matte when you get a nice mural print enlarged. A Cone 4 ink monochrome would even urge Ansel Adams to sit up and notice.

[HulaMike]

Whoa Mike! Down boy! This ain't that nice....then again, maybe it is. (blush)

The grey frame was added just to separate the beach sand element from the S2.com border. Serge mentioned that the sliver of white beach was too narrow. I thought that adding a border would separate it better. This is not how I'd frame it for showing.

As always, thanks for your kind comments.

PS: YOU were the best candidate for Critique Guru you know. I blab all over the place all the time and I get testy. You respond infrequently but with a subtle voice that adds credence to this forum. Like my mom used to say, "want to get someone's attention? .....Whisper." I should have listed to her more.

[robinp]

Mike,

Aren't you happy with the planet we live on? - many of your shots seem to be an attempt to create some alternative alien landscape!

Not enough beach, and what there is is too bright
Very uncomfortable with the small figure being slap bang in the middle - if the photo is about the relationship between the small figure and vast empty space then maybe I'd be happy with either of these two crops.

When I look at most shots posted here I'm enjoying a view of somewhere else on our planet through someone else's eyes but when I see your shots I feel like I'm in a gallery and want to quickly move on to the next exhibition or the coffee shop!

Just to put this into perspective - I'm well aware that I have an unusual aversion to alternative reality/fantasy/sci-fi/cartoon etc fiction, films and so on.
In the Seventies I was very annoyed that some of my friends "wasted" so many hours reading and discussing the Lord of the Rings trilogy, now 30 years later I'm even perceptually offended by the posters for the films.
Have never seen any of the Star Wars films (doubly offensive - not only fantasy/sci-fi but has the word "Wars" in the title).

For me our world is quite weird/varied/scary/interesting enough as it is and I really can't see the attraction in expending effort on imagining different realities - would rather enjoy discovering what's real and here now.

Sorry for this long tirade Mike, but I felt I should explain the odd quirks of my personality that cause me to be so offended by your photos!

Cheers, Robin

[Swampy]

Mike -

I don't care what Robin thinks. I like your original posted shot the best. And yes, Robin is right. It looks like something from a gallery. But, isn't that what all pictures are for? I know I want mine in gallery's, but in the end, they are all put in our own gallery of some sort.

I really like your B&W beach scenes (well, most all of them anyway - but I can't remember a bad one to knock you on right now ;) ). Keep 'em coming. Oh yeah - and what Crabby said too - ditto.

Sci-Fi. I embrace it. It's a world full of inventors who don't know how to actually do it. Sci-Fi opens the door to a sort of Pre-Pre-view of what we should expect to see in the future. Star Trek is full of them. Touch the logo on the shirt and talk to your buddy. Hmm. Police now carry walkie-talkies with the microphone up there. That's a subtle one. Late 60's/Early 70's, they have mini-CD's in a library with pictures on them. For those who watch Sci-Fi, you know what I'm talking about, or, you'll go back and look to see what you missed now maybe. Haha.

[Linda G]

Mike,

Gad, I venture to say it's too dark on my screen! <g> honestly, I like it, but would like to see the guy move a little to the left. I don't mind there being more beach, this fits nice. I do like the texture but am curious about what looks like a small retaining wall on the right.

Robin...ouch! If you don't like a genre, that's fine but wow, others do, therefor, it's a matter of taste. I look for the absurd in ordinary life. I like the normal scenics, take many of them myself, but am always looking for a new perspective.

[Swampy]

Mike,

Gad, I venture to say it's too dark on my screen! <g> honestly, I like it, but would like to see the guy move a little to the left. I don't mind there being more beach, this fits nice. I do like the texture but am curious about what looks like a small retaining wall on the right.

Robin...ouch! If you don't like a genre, that's fine but wow, others do, therefor, it's a matter of taste. I look for the absurd in ordinary life. I like the normal scenics, take many of them myself, but am always looking for a new perspective.

I like the guy in the middle. I was going to say something about the "Thing" on the right. I guess it should have been taken out in my view. Looks like a canoe or something pulled up on the beach, which takes away the effect of me liking the guy in the middle. To me, it's like the guy is "stranded in the middle" sine there's no civilization in the picture. Although- he's on a cell phone, so how did he get there with a working cell phone? LOL

Now that I think about it, if I don't have anything contructive or nice to say, I stay out of the thread (usually). Not to say that I dislike a lot of the pictures here, I just comment on the ones I really like or think I can offer something constructive on. :)

[robinp]

Mike -

I don't care what Robin thinks. I like your original posted shot the best. And yes, Robin is right. It looks like something from a gallery. But, isn't that what all pictures are for?

.

Depends on whether you want your pictures to be considered as art - I have no ambitions to have my pictures in a gallery, sold as postcards maybe but never in a gallery.
I think the genre Linda assumes I don't like is called "art for art's sake".



Now that I think about it, if I don't have anything contructive or nice to say, I stay out of the thread (usually). Not to say that I dislike a lot of the pictures here, I just comment on the ones I really like or think I can offer something constructive on. :)

I'd go along with you on that generally Swampy, its just that somehow Mike's pictures are strong enough to affect me in a negative way.
Having tried to explain (to myself) why I don't like them I'll steer clear of commenting negatively on them in the future.

Cheers, Robin

[crabby]

Mike, It is that good! Really. IMO. There are only a couple details that make it just under flawless. The sand in the foreground is largely parallel with the edge of the frame. What can you do? Distort, Rotate slightly CW, clone a little higher sand mound, call in a dump truck, live with it. I'd probably spend hours cloning in a little higher, more rounded mound of sand and then say I think I like the original better. Live with it. Second, it would be nice if the guy was being hit with a slightly stronger beam of light to set him off a little. What can you do? Expensive lighting crew with a big soft light to give him an extra stop, nah, maybe a little tweek on him on photoshop. But it can't look forced or fake. By far the biggest flaw is that I can't get that stupid catch phrase "Can you here me now" out of my head. What can I do? :beerchug: :beerchug: :beerchug:
I think the subject being in the middle horizontally but not vertically is perfect. It gives some balance and serenity, but not too much, to a scene that is otherwise chaotic. There are no geometrical shapes in the scene, no level horizon, hardly even a straight line at all. Pure chaos.
That thing on the right makes me think. What is it? I reminds me of a long country road in Kansas. What is it? But it looks to small to be a road off to nowhere. I don't know. The guy must be huge, way bigger then the mountains. That can't be, it's not logical. It makes me think, more importantly it makes me wonder.
Thanks for giving the right side of my brain a break.

[HulaMike]

Robin, please feel free to comment however you want on any picture of mine. Like I've said from day one here, we all have a right to our opinions and this is a good place to discuss them with others.

I'll try to answer some of your thoughts and Bryans and Linda's too.

First, this is a straight photo of a guy on a beach with an interesting cloud pattern. It isn't intended to stretch anyone's sensibilities at all. It's not sci-fi like the manipulated "Bridge" photo posted the other day. This is pretty tame as images go. What I found interesting is what I always find interesting in a good picture, a confluence of shape and lines, color and tone that makes a photo work as a 2 dimensional image. I often don't care what the subject matter is in my pics; and this goes for when I was shooting underwater too where most shooters are only interested in "text book" snaps of a fish or nudibranch. Getting a good ID fish pic was the main objective I suppose but for me there had to be something more compelling in the composition than that. I judge all 2 dimensional images this way. Goes back to when I studied Art and painting as a young man but mostly it's the eye I was born with.

When I'm at a gallery I spend hours in front of work at nose length looking for technical insight into the print / painting / drawing as much as I do absorbing the implied scene or message. So, we do have a fundamental difference here. You seem to be looking for easy to understand point of capture windows that transport you to a known place in time and space. I'm looking for compelling images that take me a step beyond that.

Thanks for the effort in cropping, it does help me understand your take, but they do nothing for me at all. You've transformed a composition full of tension and drama into a snapshot.

Hope this helps but as I said we all have a right to differing opinions. Yours is valid for you, mine is valid for me. I make images for my approval as a fine art photographer; a luxury many commercial photographers don't have.

PS: That image on the right is the tip of a small rock pier going out to controll beach erosion. (same wall in the "Bridge" shot) I thought about taking it out but decided to leave it in as it was somewhat a canoe shape and was also pretty much in shadow and not all that visibl in the shot.

[jesd]

Amazing shot. I guess that for me it about a "little guy under BIG and heavy clouds". I feel the weight of the sky :) I like it exactly as it is.

Jes

[Tom Nolle]

Love the shot and think it illustrates how valuable b&w can be. Wide-angle images in color seem to often fall short of the reality of the scene. Somehow rendering them in b&w gets you looking a different way.

Tom

[HulaMike]

Thanks Tom & Jes. I appreciate your comments.