Uprooted - B&W

[DanK]

You are, of course, quite correct - although it should be apparent to whom I was referring. It would also be interesting to hear whether someone from a R to L reading culture prefers the original, and for similar reasons.

Cheers.
Philip

A very interesting question. I do read one language that goes from right to left, but it isn't my native language, and I am not a very fluent reader in it. I may find an opportunity to do a little unrepresentative test of this.

[rpcrowe]

Grahame, I like the original image and the flipped image quite well.

However, if you want to change the image; I am wondering if you have enough distance to be able to back up and use a longer focal length lens. This might compress the tree against the head of land in the background....

In another direction, a wider angle lens and getting a portion of that tree up close might be another thought.

[Stagecoach]

Brian: My comment about wishing the clouds were also in focus is just a preference that in this case their shape and speed of movement might not be the ideal clouds to capture while using such a powerful neutral density filter. Actually, my use of the term, in focus, isn't accurate because it's probably the motion blur, not a lack of focus, that is unappealing to me.

Mike, I'm suspecting that the control of shutter speed for scenes such as the regular seascapes I do is going to be determined more by the affect it has on clouds rather than the water. There was no thought as to how the clouds would turn out in this example and they were pretty dense overhead.

Hopefully I can find time to do some experimentation with different cloud density's, types and shutter speeds to get an idea of what can be achieved.

[Stagecoach]

I like this. I think I agree with John that at least a slightly less wide perspective would work better. Both for balance and because the top parts of the sky have motion blur, I would consider cropping a wee bit off the top. I tried it, and I think it helps.

I agree Dan, the crop removes some of the uninteresting area.

[Stagecoach]

Grahame, I like the original image and the flipped image quite well.

Thank you Richard

However, if you want to change the image; I am wondering if you have enough distance to be able to back up and use a longer focal length lens. This might compress the tree against the head of land in the background....

I'm pretty sure I can use the 80-400 on this from quite a distance and there may be the possibility of capturing it with the tide coming in around it without getting wet

In another direction, a wider angle lens and getting a portion of that tree up close might be another thought.

This is certainly worth a try.

[Mike Buckley]

There was no thought as to how the clouds would turn out in this example

The clouds are two-thirds of the scene. Not to be glib, especially considering that you are typically such a good and thinking photographer, but none of us should ignore the impact of anything on such a large portion of the scene.

[Stagecoach]

The clouds are two-thirds of the scene. Not to be glib, especially considering that you are typically such a good and thinking photographer, but it doesn't make sense that any photographer should ignore the impact of a neutral density filter on such a large portion of the scene.

Mike, perhaps I should explain the reasoning behind that comment

The primary reason I had visited this location was to try out my new Nikon 16-35mm (finally on a real tripod) and at the same time test/verify the spread sheet I had produced for exposure times with the Big Stopper.

I used the tree trunks within the seascape as an easy subject that would show lens quality and whether I need to 'adjust' my spreadsheet figures. How the clouds would have appeared in the scene was of little interest at that time for the data and results I was attempting to compile.

Having looked closely at the subjects whilst there and then coming home and PPing the results I could see that there is further potential with these subjects to try and improve compositions. Next time I go I will be concentrating on composition and not recording lots of shots for data analysis.

As for results from the outing tests I'm pleased to now know;

a) Reports that this lens is very soft at the edges are of no concern to me.
b) Reports that this lens at 16mm has excessive distortion are of no concern to me. Interestingly, the correction profile in ACR for it gives a wavy horizon but undertaking a minor manual adjustment of 'distortion' in ACR gives a very straight horizon.
c) My speadsheet figures gave good exposure results.

[Mike Buckley]

It's clear that your test session provided lots of helpful information to you, Grahame. Very reassuring to you, I'm sure!

[Wavelength]

A wonderful composition

[selig1656]

Outstanding capture and depicted so well in the blk/wht mode . The clouds are blurred a slight bit , but that speaks of movement . The main subject is clear and sharp . I would play around with variations of the tones or filters for blk/wht .

[Stagecoach]

A wonderful composition

Thank you for commenting Nandakumar.

[Stagecoach]

Outstanding capture and depicted so well in the blk/wht mode . The clouds are blurred a slight bit , but that speaks of movement . The main subject is clear and sharp . I would play around with variations of the tones or filters for blk/wht .

Thank you Raymond. B&W is something I very rarely do but must take the time to learn.

[IzzieK]

Ok, my turn...I tried to read the comments of others but I see I will still have a different thought, so I gave up reading -- I like the second shot, the closer one. Also the one you did not show here, the bigger piccie in smugmug. I did not like the flipped version because of the bulk of the root up front, whereas in the original, the root of the tree is in sync with the island. One thing that came to mind about another method of shooting this is to move a little more to the right so that the tip of the island is in line with the root of the tree. But I digress...I like the original second version and the one in smugmug is even better. Just thinking out loud, there! I wasn't able to change the tide here at all (unintended pun) ... LOL ...

Very nice composition...

[Rebel]

I like the original, but if the root end is the most interesting bit why is it the furthest away? or have I got the wrong end of the stick

[Stagecoach]

Ok, my turn...I tried to read the comments of others but I see I will still have a different thought, so I gave up reading -- I like the second shot, the closer one. Also the one you did not show here, the bigger piccie in smugmug. I did not like the flipped version because of the bulk of the root up front, whereas in the original, the root of the tree is in sync with the island. One thing that came to mind about another method of shooting this is to move a little more to the right so that the tip of the island is in line with the root of the tree. But I digress...I like the original second version and the one in smugmug is even better. Just thinking out loud, there! I wasn't able to change the tide here at all (unintended pun) ... LOL ...

Very nice composition...

Hi Izzie,

Thank your for your comments they are appreciated. I have just posted another tree from the same session on the site.

All plans to go and shoot these trees again unfortunately seem to have come to a grinding halt. Since coming back from the UK with my new toys itching to be used I have shot a major marathon and wheelbarrow race, with some 900 images to deal with and am now preparing for a project shooting children that has come from from one of the charities involved.

But the good news, the photo comp I entered some time ago and posted about their delays in judging and organisation finally announced the winner, I got press coverage for 1st place with the picture but still await my prize

[Stagecoach]

I like the original, but if the root end is the most interesting bit why is it the furthest away? or have I got the wrong end of the stick

Hi Matt,

The image was one of a few taken during a session with the primary intention of testing a new lens at its widest so lots of sea horizon to judge distortion and at the same time use a LEE big stopper for the first time.

Composition potential was unfortunately not fully addressed at that time but that root needs to be the major subject in the next opportunity I get.

So yes, I did shoot the wrong end of the stick

[bnnrcn]

Hi Grahame . I'm glad that you had the opportunity for your first trial , enjoy your new stuff Just a small tip : You can take a shot of the same scene without the ND filter and use the sky in that shot instead of the one in the long exposure shot. Sometimes it gives nice results

[Stagecoach]

Hi Grahame . I'm glad that you had the opportunity for your first trial , enjoy your new stuff Just a small tip : You can take a shot of the same scene without the ND filter and use the sky in that shot instead of the one in the long exposure shot. Sometimes it gives nice results

Hi Binnur,

For each of these I took a shot without the ND to determine exposure and suspect it would be something I do for each future occasion. I had also thought about composites but that's cheating

Seriously, I agree it's something to be considered along with a gradient composite of the two skies.

[IzzieK]

Hi Izzie,

But the good news, the photo comp I entered some time ago and posted about their delays in judging and organisation finally announced the winner, I got press coverage for 1st place with the picture but still await my prize

Have you uploaded any shots from the wheelbarrow race yet? Do you have a link? I have not been as active here as before so I might have missed it. Wonderful news about the competition...hopefully you got your prize soon, not just the prestige. The arts communities have noticed you more since you retired from your regular job and became an almost full time photographer so I guess you will never retire. Just go on winning first prizes. It will be a nice chunk of legacy for 'ron (Aussie talk for 'later on').

Congratulations again. You deserve it!