The Twilight Zone......

[Phil-D]

.....and more light trails

I'm unsure on the first, when I took it I thought it worked but since looking at it on the monitor and doing a little PP, I can't make me mind up

The 2nd needs a re-vist, the traffic on the left (tail lights) was nearly at a stand still so even at 25 seconds the trails aren't just right, but it was a lovely coloured sky

Honest crit and feedback appreciated, tell me what you think

Thanks for looking, Phil

The Twilight Zone by Phil Dyson, on Flickr


M62 Outlane Sunset by Phil Dyson, on Flickr

 

[TimmyG]

I like the first Phil, although I feel you should have mounted the camera higher. I want to see that view too!

The light trails look great, but not sure about the fence in the foreground. It's stopping me from progressing further. You are right about that sky

 

[iwols]

love both they work for me

 

[Steve B]

Have to agree, the first is the much stronger image, I do like what you have done.
An alternative suggestion though, as I suspect getting high enough to include the view might have been difficult. The main elements are the sky and the silhouette, so a lower viewpoint could have worked aswell. A slightly more relaxed pose, say an arm on the back of the bench could have injected a more peaceful feel to the image too. Just an idea or thinking out loud if you prefer

Completely agree with Tim on the second, the fence does act as a barrier, probably what it was built for but it does stop the eye from exploring further into the shot.
If it wasn't for that gorgeous sky, I would have been tempted to use a longer lens, to make a bit more of the overbridge and the S curve of the motorway.
Maybe an idea for your next visit ???
Hope this doesn't sound too negative, certainly not intended to be.

 

[GWR100]

Hi Phil, No 1 is a lovely picture, so simple but so powerful, No.2 I have to agree about the fence, it does look a bit clumsy and keeps getting in the way of the main scene, maybe burn it back a bit?

Geoff

 

[Phil-D]

I like the first Phil, although I feel you should have mounted the camera higher. I want to see that view too!

The light trails look great, but not sure about the fence in the foreground. It's stopping me from progressing further. You are right about that sky

love both they work for me

Have to agree, the first is the much stronger image, I do like what you have done.
An alternative suggestion though, as I suspect getting high enough to include the view might have been difficult. The main elements are the sky and the silhouette, so a lower viewpoint could have worked aswell. A slightly more relaxed pose, say an arm on the back of the bench could have injected a more peaceful feel to the image too. Just an idea or thinking out loud if you prefer

Completely agree with Tim on the second, the fence does act as a barrier, probably what it was built for but it does stop the eye from exploring further into the shot.
If it wasn't for that gorgeous sky, I would have been tempted to use a longer lens, to make a bit more of the overbridge and the S curve of the motorway.
Maybe an idea for your next visit ???
Hope this doesn't sound too negative, certainly not intended to be.

Hi Phil, No 1 is a lovely picture, so simple but so powerful, No.2 I have to agree about the fence, it does look a bit clumsy and keeps getting in the way of the main scene, maybe burn it back a bit?

Geoff

Thanks for the comments and feedback

@Steve B..... no, it doesn't sound negative at all Steve, honest crit is exactly what I was after

Its a first for me, setting the camera then running round to get in frame , I think I was putting more into that than I was the actual composition, higher or lower, both a good shout and something I'll take on board when I re-visit. I was there with Dan @drooke , I did suggest once over that we both sat on the bench, in a manly, non-romatic sort of way .......but then thought ........no, we'd better not bother .

The arm in a relax position along the bench top was one that didn't cross my mind on the night either, but again, could work well, cheers

I want to see that view too

Tim, if we ever get round to another meet over my way, its only about 10 minutes drive from Scammonden Bridge, you can see the view for yourself

The fence in the 2nd...........I struggle finding foreground interest in landscapes, I just don't 'see it' a lot of the time. I think my problem is, its drilled home that we need some sort of interest in the foreground, I've notice some folks can find it in anything and it works, some times it can be staring me right in the face......and I still don't see it :banghead:

I have one very similar that I took from over the fence, using the rocks that are just beyond, the light trails aren't as full due to the near stationary traffic, but I'll have a look and post that up, see if it works better than the fence

Again, thanks for the crit/comments , much appreciated

 

[Steve B]

I did suggest once over that we both sat on the bench, in a manly, non-romatic sort of way .......but then thought ........no, we'd better not bother .

It's ART mate init, that sort of thing is allowed

 

[TimmyG]

Tim, if we ever get round to another meet over my way, its only about 10 minutes drive from Scammonden Bridge, you can see the view for yourself

The fence in the 2nd...........I struggle finding foreground interest in landscapes, I just don't 'see it' a lot of the time. I think my problem is, its drilled home that we need some sort of interest in the foreground, I've notice some folks can find it in anything and it works, some times it can be staring me right in the face......and I still don't see it

The problem here is that the eye catches the fences and then is led along to the opening and right out of frame - away from the main area of interest. I saw something interesting a few weeks ago. Really big landscape prints with fences or walls right across the lower part of the frame. Ordinarily these would be an obstruction to the viewer (as they would be in the physical world) but these worked due to the fact that the barriers featured either a gate or a style. This, just as in real life, allowed you access over the barrier and out into the wider landscape, even if the gate was shut. It was quite remarkable once I'd figured out why it worked and it was something I made a mental note to try out at the next opportunity.

 

[G.K.Jnr.]

Two very nice images Phil, with #1 being the stronger of the two for me.

George.

 

[Phil-D]

Two very nice images Phil, with #1 being the stronger of the two for me.

George.

Thanks George

The problem here is that the eye catches the fences and then is led along to the opening and right out of frame - away from the main area of interest. I saw something interesting a few weeks ago. Really big landscape prints with fences or walls right across the lower part of the frame. Ordinarily these would be an obstruction to the viewer (as they would be in the physical world) but these worked due to the fact that the barriers featured either a gate or a style. This, just as in real life, allowed you access over the barrier and out into the wider landscape, even if the gate was shut. It was quite remarkable once I'd figured out why it worked and it was something I made a mental note to try out at the next opportunity.

I can see exactly what you mean Tim, I've no idea why I don't see these things sometimes. Looking at it again, there was no reason why I didn't move more to my left, using just the last couple of foot of the fence, lending in from the right corner, it would have maybe helped to lead in, instead of away.

On one of the meets a month back, I was up at Sutton Bank with Tim (randomwindows) and Rich. We were all saying how good the view was but hardly any foreground interest. I'd been stood by a wooden gate, never gave it a thought, Tim moved in, swung the gate back and it gave him something to lead into the image, an idea I just didn't see.

Thanks for the feedback and ideas mate, much appreciated