Of Vines and Fences...

[jiro]

Thank you very much for viewing.

-----
Nikon D70, 50mm, ISO 400, f/2.8 at 1/400 second.

[dje]

Thank you very much for viewing.

-----
Nikon D70, 50mm, ISO 400, f/2.8 at 1/400 second.

Willie, this one really does it for me. I think it's the simplicity and the lighting, not to mention the creativity. Great stuff, cheers Dave

[jiro]

Thank you very much, Dave.

[Seriche]

I agree with everything Dave said. It's a poignant image. Nature transforming those wires into something beautiful.

Simplicity appears so easy to attain in theory (in all areas of life) but so hard to put into practice, especially in images. Lovely to see how you've done it here

Seri

[MiniChris]

I love the overall lighting effect and simplicity of the shot but not so sure the lighting source isn't too, competitively strong. Could it have been framed without the dominance of the yellow light in the top center background (or at least by half)?

[Donald]

Yep. Keep it simple. Them's the best ones!

I note Chris' point re that yellow light.

[ilovelucydog]

I like it. (Donald said keep it simple)

[jiro]

I love the overall lighting effect and simplicity of the shot but not so sure the lighting source isn't too, competitively strong. Could it have been framed without the dominance of the yellow light in the top center background (or at least by half)?

I note Chris' point re that yellow light.

How about this?

[jiro]

I like it. (Donald said keep it simple)

Thanks, Mary.

[jiro]

I agree with everything Dave said. It's a poignant image. Nature transforming those wires into something beautiful.

Simplicity appears so easy to attain in theory (in all areas of life) but so hard to put into practice, especially in images. Lovely to see how you've done it here

Seri

Thanks, Seri.

[Seriche]

I can see Chris's point, but somehow the loss of the yellow light makes the leaves seem less luminous to me.

Both versions are good though. So hard to decide for sure.

Seri

[MiniChris]

Hmmmmmmmm...I like it more without the light, but I am not so sure you couldn't leave part of the light in, or tone it down a bit and get the effect Seriche likes. It is indeed a tough call, and in the end, as always, it is your call.

[jiro]

Hmmmmmmmm...I like it more without the light, but I am not so sure you couldn't leave part of the light in, or tone it down a bit and get the effect Seriche likes. It is indeed a tough call, and in the end, as always, it is your call.

OK. This is the 3rd edit:



Better?

[Donald]

Willie

The fact is that it's a d.... good image whichever way you cut it. As to the final presentation, don't forget that whilst we all pitch in with our opinions, the best one is the one that best matches the image you had in your head when you pressed the button.

[jiro]

Thanks, Donald. My preference is actually #1. I was experimenting on an idea of mine on this one. I intentionally incorporated the light source but used it as a secondary subject (or should I say tertiary) since my main subject is the combination of the vine and fences. So, I used what I know to pin the focus on the main subject, namely brighter, with more contrast, sharper, in focus compared to the other parts inside the frame. Using myself as a guinea pig, what i did notice was that even if the light source was included, yeah, my eyes wandered to it a little bit but then my attention kept coming back to the backlit leaves of the vine. When I subdued and taken the light source out of the frame it tend to lose the interaction I had before. It was just an experiment, though primarily what really caught my attention and interest was that subtle lighting on the backlit leaves. Hope this helps on the analysis of why I made this shot.