Stoerhead

[Donald]

The composition was the big question with this one ... and it took me ages to set it up. Luckily the wind wasn't too strong and it wasn't cold.

So, to illustrate the thinking process that took place on a wild cliff top on the north-western boundary of Europe:-

What proportion land to sea to include to show the land, but convey the sense of scale of the open sea (this is looking north and the next stop is the Arctic Circle)? Where to place the horizon to help convey that sense of scale but still retain something of the sky .. at the same time as making sure enough of those two bits of rock at the bottom were included as I considered them an essential part of the image. And then, finally, get the white water to synchronise so that it all appeared at the same time (didn't have a lot of control over that one).

Always keen to read the views of peers as to whether I succeeded.


40D, 24-70mm f/2.8L @ 24mm. ISO100. 1/4@f16

[Stagecoach]

I consider you have got the proportions spot on Donald.

The image viewed in the lytebox immediately gives a very strong feeling of being up high and looking down, quite eerie.

[Kodiak]

The composition was the big question with this one… Always keen to read the views of peers as to whether I succeeded.

"…convey the sense of scale…"
These are the key words, for me, in your presentation Donald, and
I see that you have thrown away the simplest, most readily available
and decisive asset this shot was created with: the 2X3 frame format.

The vertical extension of that ratio could contain and express the sense
of scale you were looking for. I would be interested to see the original
whole take of that scene.

[Kaye Leggett]

I love the way the light is hitting your bottom rock and agree those rocks add to the sense of scale. I think I would have put a tad more sea and a tad less land to draw my attention to the open sea more than the land.

[Shadowman]

Hi Donald,

The composition doesn't really work for me, perhaps it's what appears to be a severe crop of the rock formation in the foreground; I know you probably captured it this way and didn't crop in post process. I think it's because the contrast of the foreground rocks is so strong that it immediately pulls my eyes downward and I somehow expect to see more. I'm wondering if it was the colors that attracted you to the scene more than the land mass? Would be interesting to see if the colors had some compatibility.

John

[kdoc856]

Hi, Donald.

Difficult task you've undertaken. As much as I've come to appreciate 1:1 aspect, I think it may be hurting you here, and a 3:2 vertical extension as Kodiak suggested would be an interesting alternative. I do think it critical that you preserve your foreground inclusion- the vertical surf lines extending from it form very nice diagonals and lead us to a vanishing point far out to sea, and contribute significantly to the sense of vastness.

[Donald]

Thank you for your observations, everyone. They are always appreciated and always provide information to consider.

[Geoff F]

I suppose you could crop a fraction from the sky and left side and still 'go square'.