Unashamed minimalism!

Hi Sam. I think this lacks impact. Often, with this sort of minimal landscape some sort of recession, layers, lines, graduations of color make the image work. I don't think it does here. There is too much bland uninteresting sky and the foreground just doesn't grab. May be if it was snow covered or frosty or foggy it might look more mysterious.
 
I viewed it in Flickr Lightbox to consider my answer. I think you've done well here, personally I'd pull the saturation down further in the greens and up the contrast of the mountains just a tad, but that's just me.
 
I agree that the sky is 'uninteresting'; I can see some layers but not obvious so maybe if you add a gradient filter to bring it out a little more?
The 3 compo works but I will probably go for a square crop and 1:8 ratio as well - just really fancy getting rid of the grass in the foreground. :D
 
Last edited:
thanks for your thoughts. I think firstly I must say that the image was meant to be about subtle lines and colours and intentionally lacked oomph and contrast. The wall itself was such a strong feature of the landscape, cutting through very decisively, that I used to do the same with the frame.

However there was something bugging about it so I've incorporated some suggestions voiced here and adjusted the crop, lessened the green saturation and brought the hill in the background out a touch. That said, anymore and the image splits as it was very murky..!

Improvement?


border by pottering around Photography, on Flickr
 
Bennp2000 said:
I viewed it in Flickr Lightbox to consider my answer. I think you've done well here, personally I'd pull the saturation down further in the greens and up the contrast of the mountains just a tad, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

I agree with this and it does need viewed in Lightbox (as its almost a different image) to see it correctly
 

aa by mrcrow_uk, on Flickr


cut the sky and just have 3 elements...the colour the hedge and the grass
?
 
Last edited:
potteringaround said:
thanks for your thoughts. I think firstly I must say that the image was meant to be about subtle lines and colours and intentionally lacked oomph and contrast. The wall itself was such a strong feature of the landscape, cutting through very decisively, that I used to do the same with the frame.

However there was something bugging about it so I've incorporated some suggestions voiced here and adjusted the crop, lessened the green saturation and brought the hill in the background out a touch. That said, anymore and the image splits as it was very murky..!

Improvement?


border by pottering around Photography, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I think this one is better. :D The crop feels more 'right' :love:

Here's my try (square crop, 1:8 ratio)

23iijcg.jpg


:D
 
I prefer the 2nd one Sam. My mind wants to straighten the gap between the wall and the grass :LOL:
 
Gandhi said:
Looks best in the first one.

The impact is actually in the lack of immediate impact. That and the graphic nature of the shapes contained in the image.

I think Gursky recently sold something similar for quite a large wedge!

http://www.highsnobiety.com/news/20...-becomes-most-expensive-photograph-ever-sold/
Click to expand...

you got me... more a homage :)

i think I do prefer the original. I can see how the pano crop creates more impact but that was not the objective. More to create a subtle view with an impression of the hills behind. the stark, blank sky contrasting with the solid wall and field.

all the comments certainly got me thinking though - if only to come back round to the original then it has been worth it! I will however keep the lower saturation and slightly darker hill! (y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top