Sunrise at Seahouses

[Donald]

Some of you have seen a version of this that I posted over a year ago, with which neither I nor those of you who commented were very enamoured.

It's sat and bugged me ever since.

Yesterday I bought the new version of DxO Optics Raw processor (Pro 7) and was wanting an image to play with to test-drive it (the software). So I chose this. As I 'doodled' with what's new in DxO Optics Pro 7, I began to 'see' what I think I had wanted to do in the first place, but had not succeeded. So, I stuck with it and this emerged.

Comments & criticism are always welcomed.

This was captured at 6:42am in the little town of Seahouses on the north-east coast of England.


40D, 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM @ 26mm. ISO100. 1/30@f5.6. 2-Stop GND

[CougarFool]

I can see where you were trying to go with this image. I didn't see the original but I like this one. It has good composition, good leading lines, strong textures and excellent exposure. The detail is still held very well: the family with their car at the very end and the guy paying for his ticket in the middleground. A nice atmospheric, contrasty shot.
This short of image always make me feel cold, brrrr!

[Steve S]

To me donald, this image has a feeling of conflict. The pad of concrete in the forground, that breaks the line(really grabs my attention at first)----The ground says rain, and the sky says sunshine. Very interesting image.

[Bags]

I agree with Steve S. If you were to crop that foreground patch the image becomes cleaner and the lines more pure. nice exposure, great texture.

[Colin1957]

I agree with the comment about cropping the front patch of concrete. It cuts one of the lead-in lines and disrupts the progress of the eye towards the real subject of what is a great image. I think that I would limit the crop to the bottom (and not also the left side) as the wall is such a strong lead-in line.

[JPS]

Hi Donald,
could we please see the original? I was just wondering what bugged you about the original so much.
Sort of feel I've been there myself; but know I haven't, strange!!

Nearly forgot, I do like what you have created now.
Cheers
John

[Donald]

Right , try again - Just wrote a reply and then lost it!!

Thanks for all the comments. Constructive and helpful, as always.

My only issue with the crop that some of you have suggested, is that I'd then lose the square format, to which I'm firmly wedded at the moment. I could get a square out of it, but It wouldn't work, I don't think. But I take your point.

Maybe it needs to finally be consigned to the 'You tried, but ....' folder.

As for what I tried to do over a year ago. Well, that was very different. You can see that here. I was still trying to get lines and texture and was playing down the sky. But it just didn't hit the buttons. And that's an even stronger opinion now that I go back and look at it. Not sure what I was thinking about.

The fact remains, however, that my re-work cannot be held to be the expression of the vision I had at the time I took the shot. Or, if it is, then that was sub-conscious. I didn't see the extent of the drama in the sky until I started re-working this a couple of days ago. And, therefore, I have the feeling that this is not as 'legitimate' an image as I would like to produce. I very much aim to 'see' the final image at the time of capture. I didn't 'see' this image. Inasmuch as what I did feel at the time was the coldness and drabness early in the morning after a wet and windy night, then I suppose I'm seeking to represent that. Mmmm!

Don't know how much sense that last bit makes to people, but it's one of the 'rules' I try to impose upon myself.

[CougarFool]

Well, it made me feel cold so you have managed to convey that sense. I have looked at the original and think that this version is far superior!

Thanks for the link to Michael Kenna's site: I will go and have a look later.