Photo somehow lacks the "Wow & Umph" factor

[blackgold]

Was cycling this morning when I came across this beautiful tree which looks like a giant "Bonsai".
I took a u-turn and took these shots at 24mm.
Pic 307 had the top half of the picture sharp and well focused but the bottom half seem to have motion blur. At 1/160...is this not enough?

Nevertheless, while I am please with the shots, they somehow lack the wow factor. I welcome suggestions and teachings. Thanks :-)





Pics 302, 306 and 307. 305 being the worst as I was trying out different perspective to get the effect I want.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/268862...7645124454010/

[Manfred M]

Okay - first of all I suggest you link to the images, rather than getting us to guess which ones you are referring to:

DSC00302-1lo by teckwee_yong, on Flickr


DSC00306-1lo by teckwee_yong, on Flickr


DSC00307-1lo by teckwee_yong, on Flickr

I don't see a 305.

Some thoughts:

302 - The image is too busy and unfocused. There is too much material in the background other than the main image, so our eyes are darting all over the place and distracted. You need to simplify this shot. I also find that the lighting is quite uninteresting and flat. Some of large ares of the tree are back-lit and the detail is buried in shadow.

306 - A bit more interesting and the B&W conversionn has simplified the image (which is good from a compositional standpoint), but I still find the image rather busy.

307 - is a closeup pf 302, so some of the distraction of the background is gone, but the lighting is still and issue. Again, I find nothing really draws my eyes in and says "wow".

I think the issue is that you are not seeing like your camera does, and this means you have taken some shots that don't look the way you remember seeing the scene.

[blackgold]

Thank you for your comment. Appreciate it.

You are right that I am not seeing like the camera does and I struggle with that. What I see is not what I get and this is where I am hoping to work on it till I get it right. The challenge is to have the shots taken in a clear fashion where there's little distraction.

Can you elaborate more about the lighting being flat? This was taken in the morning around 7:50am while the lighting condition was mild. In Singapore, we don't get that much of the blue sky as well which I think will also help in the pictures.

How would you have done it differently to simplify the picture? Referring to 302 and 306.

[Manfred M]

It's hard to say what I would have done differently, as I was not on site and don't really have a great feel for what the lighting is normally like. Are these images straight out of the camera jpegs or are these fromn post-processed RAW files?

The issue I have with the two shots with the tree is that our eyes tend to look at the lightest parts of the image, which in this case is the clouds in the sky so our eyes have trouble focusing on the main subject, the tree. It looks a bit back lit and parts are definitely underexposed, so I would try to dodge a bit to bring out the textures. I would probably try to increase contrast in the sky as well, to see if I could bring out some more texture. I would also look at increasing the clarity and vibrance of the two shots, on import. I'd probably add a slight vignette to pull the viewer's eyes in from the bright edges of the shot.

I find that I like your B&W best, just because it is all about the textures.

I've spent about 24 hours in Singapore and it was cloudy, rainy and overcast (this was early in March), so I can't comment on what things would be like at this time of year.