Three bales

[Donald]

When I was out amongst the straw bales on Saturday and captured this one, I also moved up the field a bit and saw this.

The dilemma was that the sky wasn't so good as when I captured that other one, the bulk of the cloud having blown over by then. Nor was the sky clear, which I think would have also been been the basis for a good image. So, the question was - Do I go for the best shot I can get now, given that the light was good for the purpose (I thought), or do you try for it again and run the risk that a) you might not get a good light and, b) the farmer may have come round and gathered in the bales?

So I went for it.

Your comment and critique is always welcomed. And in answer to the question above, you may well feel that there was no point in the first place because it's weak subject and a pretty poor composition.


40D, 24-70mm f/2.8L @ 70mm. ISO100. 1/250s@f8

[Mike Buckley]

I believe you definitely made the right choice to go for it. We hobbyists often don't have the luxury of waiting for the absolute best situation.

I like the simplicity so much that I wonder if you have considered making it even more simple by digitally creating a smooth sky; it's as if the sky is either not complex enough or not simple enough.

[Geoff F]

For me, Donald, there isn't much happening in the top sky area and having so much plain sky seems to overwhelm the bales with 'nothingness'. However, a 5 x 4 crop produces a much stronger more compact scene.

Probably looks different in colour.

[Shadowman]

Nice composition and use of light.

[FootLoose]

I like it. Well seen, Donald. I think there might be tad too much sky at the top, though. Maybe a small crop there.

BTW, do the farmers mind people wandering around their fields?

[Donald]

Thanks for your comments, folks.

BTW, do the farmers mind people wandering around their fields?

Generally not. If I had seen the farmer around, I'd have asked him if it was okay.

However and interestingly, our 'right to roam' legislation (which no-one understands properly) would actually allow me to be there so long as I wasn't impeding normal farming operations or causing any damage.

[IzzieK]

Have you thought of flipping this shot and putting the larger bale at the left side? I think it will be more balance that way...just a thought...

[Donald]

Intersting comment, Izzie, that takes us to the heart of the 'how much image manipulation is too much' debate that will, I think, run so long as people capture photographs.

Now, let me say that I am one of those who believe that photography, unless you're into reportage, should be a creative activity and it is for the creator/artist to put on display a finished image that reflects his or her vision. So, I am not a 'oh, you mustn't interefere with the SOOC picture' sort of a guy.

However, flipping something would be, for me (and I emphasise 'for me') too much. if I had to do that, then I would consider that I'd failed in terms of the composition in the first place. That's just the way my brain works and I don't suggest that anyone else should apply the same thinking.

[kdoc856]

I find "bale" images fascinating, though I'd be hard pressed to express why. I am in Geoff's camp regarding a possible crop. Removing about half of the featureless portion of the sky seems to draw the eye more effectively toward the bales.

I think bringing out a bit more detail (structure and contrast, possibly exposure reduction) in the lower clouds might be worth a look. In both the bale shots you've used a bit of contrast that works nicely and would be harmonious with more cloud contrast.

[bnnrcn]

I agree with Mike that a smoother sky would put more emphasis on the bales. I like the cylinder shape of bales very much. I don't think we have clylinder shaped ones here in Turkey. The ones I have seen are always with the shape of a rectengular prism. I like the simplicity in the composition

[IzzieK]

I thought being creative is being able to do what sort of need to be done to make the shot more interesting...oh well...to each his own.

[joebranko]

Hi Donald,
Interesting shot. Did you consider cropping out some sky? Just my opinion of course and I am just a beginner, but I read somewhere that if something does not lend to the shot, crop it out.

[Donald]

Did you consider cropping out some sky? .... I read somewhere that if something does not lend to the shot, crop it out.

You're absolutely right on that one. Joe. And the fact that you're a beginner doesn't make your opinion and less valid than that of anyone else. Which takes you to the question - Does that expanse of sky lend anything to the shot? And that's a question about composition and how you see things.

I tend to make quite a few images that have this sort of big expanse of sky. Some of those have big, bubbling clouds and some have just completely blank, featureless sky.

So, there's not a 'right' or 'wrong' on this. It's all about choice and what sort of image you want to make.

[Mike Buckley]

I read somewhere that if something does not lend to the shot, crop it out.

That's good advice. However, there is also the concept of negative space, which would be exemplified in a landscape by a very plain sky, which is the case of many of Donald's photos. My point is that though the negative space is comprised of "nothing," it is that nothingness that is actually the "something" that can add to the image and dramatically so.

The concept is strong. My explanation of it probably isn't.

[Hawki]

I personally like the shot as is. I live in a small agricultural town and scenes like this are common. Anyone that has walked these type of fields gets the exact feeling that you have captured here, 3 large bales that aren't quite that big when they are located in an endless field with endless sky.