Arty Convolvulus

[John 2]

I don't know why I like this. It just appeals to me.

Nikon D7100
70-300mm Nikkor @ 170mm
1/160 sec @ f8 ISO100
Some post processing in Topaz, PhotoTools 2.6 and PhotoKit.

[teokf]

I like it too. I think it's your composition of the positioning of the old textured pole with the fresh green creeper plant and the white flowers makes this a great pleasing pix.

[Digital]

I really like the composition of this photo.


Bruce

[Andrew1]

I imagine it would appeal to a few people. Very nice.

[Arlen]

I like it a lot. Very well done, from my point of view.

[Brownbear]

I too, think it is a lovely image... Gorgeous colour, lovely composition and the tree stump is beautifully lit and detailed.

[FootLoose]

I like this composition very much, John. While the post takes up roughly half the space in the frame, it is balanced by the vitality of the rising diagonal of the plant. The wood's aged / dead texture complements the life and colour of the flower, which as the subject of the image is located at the intersection of the three vectors.

[Rob Zijlstra]

Great comp and good pp.

Maybe a BW version?

[Shadowman]

Very nice.

[Karm Redland]

John, love your composition. This might sound like a weird comment but I think the tree stump almost has too much detail. It has what I call a hyper-real look. The tree stump looks like it was added to the image -- I know it wasn't.

karm

[John 2]

Thanks so much all of you for your comments. Sometimes you just see something that takes your eye. The post processing was just an attempt to make it less ordinary.

Greg, I can't claim any conscious following of the "rules" but you are right, all of the lines lead to the flowers and intersect on the thirds (almost). I wish I could see these things in the viewfinder.

Rob, tried mono and it works but preferred the colour version in the end.

Karm, the textured graphic overlay was deliberate but you're right, there was the danger that it overpowered the rest of the comp. Just about got away with it (I think).

Thanks again all for your comments.

[zen]

+1.

Thanks for sharing!

Zen

[FootLoose]

Greg, I can't claim any conscious following of the "rules" but you are right, all of the lines lead to the flowers and intersect on the thirds (almost). I wish I could see these things in the viewfinder.

John, I can't claim to know much about the 'rules' either, but I am currently reading Michael Freeman's The Photographer's Eye. He recognises how difficult it is for photographers to organise the frame throught the viewfinder (compared to painters who may divide their frame quite precisely if they wish), but he suggests that the more you learn to recognise the successful elements of composition in the frame, the better chance you have of 'intuitively' incorporating them into the scenes you shoot.

[John 2]

Couldn't agree more Greg. I made the just that point a couple of weeks back when rules were the subject of a dedicated thread. Hopefully, as we develop as photographers we necessarily transition through the applying the rules consciously to the point where we develop an eye for composition - whether its in the viewfinder or on the computer screen and if it looks right, it is right. I hope I'm getting there.

[rpcrowe]

I also like this for many reasons...

[John 2]

Thank you Richard.

[Plumcrak]

The composition, the sharpness, the contrasting elements...it all works very well for me

Cheers

[MrB]

I presume that all the responses above have helped you to understand the mystery you expressed in Post #1. I also like your image - for all of those same reasons.

Philip

[John 2]

Thank you Jon, thank you Philip. Yes Phillip sometimes you look at an image and just like it without analysing why but it is nice to understand why none the less.