Composition Question

[Teton Chuck]

In the this photo I tried to use the reflection in the lake to show the mountain directly across from me while having the mountain in the distance be visible both above and below the waterline. I was hoping to get the eye to move generally from the lower right to the upper left. The other issue is that I shot this with a 16mm lens and there is distortion (bending of the trees) on both sides of the photo. How can I use Elements to correct this?

I never got the light I wanted for this setting so will have to return until I get it right. C&C would be very helpful. This is a good learning opportunity for me. - Cheers, Chuck Click to enlarge.

[Andrew1]

From the main Menu,,,,,Filter>Camera Distortion. Or you might try one of the options in Filter>Distort.

[geoz]

Hi Chuck,

I like the scene and your concept. I've got to get out to the Tetons one day. As for moving the eye from lower right to upper left, for people who read English the natural way for the eye to move is from left to right. So cultures that read from left to right will usually start at the upper left. You may try mirroring the image to see if you get a different feel. There is no right way just depends on what you like and maybe your target audience. It would be interesting to impressions from people who usually read right to left or top to bottom.

George

[Teton Chuck]

Andrew and George, thank you for your input. I did manage to figure out how to use the Camera Distortion tool in Elements 10. One problem I face is that I don't know the terms that get me to the right place. Only took a few minutes once you provided the first steps.

As for rotating the image, I have run into this before in Week 41 of my Project 52. You might want to take a look at the conversation we had about that. I think we agreed that flipping the image becomes problematic when the people who will see your image live nearby and know how it looks in real life.

Thanks to both of you for taking your time to respond to my question. Very helpful in both cases. - Chuck

[Mike Buckley]

I was hoping to get the eye to move generally from the lower right to the upper left.

That's exactly what happened for me and that was before I read your explanation.

[geoz]

flipping the image becomes problematic when the people who will see your image live nearby and know how it looks in real life.

You're right - I wouldn't do it either.
George

[FrankMi]

You are definitely on the right track these landscape postings Chuck.

I've read that:

"In a Landscape, the more of the following elements you include, the happier it makes the viewer: Fresh water, meadows, mountains, distant sky, forest, and sometimes pathways."

...and, "Reflections (such as you have here) can be used to double the view. When using a lake, river, or ocean, get as close to the water as possible. Being close to the surface of the water may produce an unexpected benefit of being able to capture objects under the water such as stones or fish, dramatically increasing the depth of the image."

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi chuck, for me this image is almost there, personally i would have swung my body around so that the river led almost to the top left of the image. This would have eliminated a lot of the foreground in the bottom left and the left hand tree line which i feel add very little to the image.

[KCBrecks]

I covered the right of the picture as far as the first peak and found that my eye was guided by the reflection as you wanted. The dip in the right hand bottom corner seems to be acting as a sort of ratchet and holding the view.

[Teton Chuck]

Thanks to all of you for the input. Frank, I need to print out your list and take it into the field with me. In addition it would be nice to have a neutral density gradient filter but for the time being I will have to rely on PP. I have not tried a polarizing filter in this location but may do so on my next outing. Maybe I can show more of the lake bottom and if I am lucky even a fish or two.

Mark, I will try your suggestion on my nest outing. I'm not absolutely possible I can pull it off, but I look forward to the challenge of giving it a try, or is it a go?

Keith, I covered the image and there is a substantial difference when the "dip" is removed. Here is my dilemma. I was trying to show that there is a mountain directly across the lake from me but still keep the focus on the pointed peak in the distance. When I cover the dip the mountain reflection seems to become a ridge that leads to the peak in the distance. Did I accomplish my goal of helping the viewer imagine the bigger scene or is this a failed experiment? Either way it is a very valuable learning experience for me.

Cheers, Chuck

[Mark von Kanel]

Chuck, i dont think an nd grad would work for this photo, i think you would be better to bracket your shots fro the sky and land and then merge them in photoshop, this is something im going to have a go at when im home.