Accross the Chinese Bridge to the Folly at the Wimpole Estate in late winter

[Rufus]

I like the visual interest of the bridge, the lead in it provides to the folly, and the mound of brambles in the middle ground which breaks up the field. The folly is far enough away and the bridge of sufficient interest to keep the eye moving around the picture, which may be another way of saying I am not quite sure what the subject is!

Photgraphically, it is a shame the tree on the right has been so drasticaly pruned, but I don't have the knowledge or skill yet to attempt a substitution for it in the image.

But ultimately this is just a nice scene and the image was good enough for me to want to practice with LR and PS.

C&C is always welcome.

[Shadowman]

I think the pruned tree fits the character of the bridge and fall colors of the foliage, nicely captured.

[JBW]

Well seen. Would you consider lightening or darkening or perhaps simply sharpening the tower to help draw the eye to it?

[Geoff F]

There is an option here, David. Go to a panoramic ratio and crop out the cut bits of that tree. You lose a bit of sky but I think it will still work and draw more attention to the tower.

[Rufus]

Well seen. Would you consider lightening or darkening or perhaps simply sharpening the tower to help draw the eye to it?

Aha! I did darken the tower, Brian, because it was quite pale. Darkening it helped it stand out from the clouds. Maybe I needed to do some more. Do you think this may be a tad too much as the tower is now rather darker than the adjacent walls or does that not matter? (My PS skills don't extend to selecting walls that are partially hidden by branches. )



Thank you for commenting.

David

[Rufus]

There is an option here, David. Go to a panoramic ratio and crop out the cut bits of that tree. You lose a bit of sky but I think it will still work and draw more attention to the tower.

Thank you Geoff. Is this what you had in mind?



The sky that is lost was not that interesting so that is actually no loss at all. I took a little of the foreground away too, and darkened the tower as Brian suggested. This version gives greater prominence to the bridge as well as the tower. Somehow losing the top of the thick trunk helps it recede. I suppose that is because the eye is less inclined to follow the trunk skywards. I am surprised how much change in the compositional construction results from so little cropping.

David

[JBW]

Aha! I did darken the tower, Brian, because it was quite pale. Darkening it helped it stand out from the clouds. Maybe I needed to do some more. Do you think this may be a tad too much as the tower is now rather darker than the adjacent walls or does that not matter? (My PS skills don't extend to selecting walls that are partially hidden by branches. )



Thank you for commenting.

David

As this is a learning experience how about trying to darken it ONLY on the right half to match the shadows in the foreground

[JBW]

Personally I crop first and I usually end up spending a bit of time exploring to find the right crop.

[Jim A]

I am following this thread with very much interest. As Brian says, how to highlight the tower as the (very interesting) foreground is so dominant? I must say that I am perplexed at the moment. What draw me to this image was the identification of the "folly". In one sense we have an aristocracy that could (then and now) afford such luxuries on a whim, and on the other we have a general population, living hand to mouth. The Brits have such a great heritage .... but at what cost? Anyway, I digress .. will watch with keen interest.

[Rufus]

Personally I crop first and I usually end up spending a bit of time exploring to find the right crop.

Yes, my approach is also to crop first, but perhaps I don't spend enough time exploring. The original image placed the tower around the "thirds" area, but I should have explored further. I like the cropping out of some of the sky in post #6 but I now feel just a little more space above the tower would suit better. I am clearly too impatient.

I will have another attempt today.

David

[MrB]

The main point here for me is that the tower needed to be more prominent in the composition. If it had been possible, shooting at 105 rather than 70 could have made the tower relatively bigger. The suggested crop helps and perhaps could go further - to remove some distractions at the sides, particularly the tree+reflection which competes for the viewer's attention. Also, in the digital view, is the wide white border enhancing the image?

Philip

[Shadowman]

At this point in the exercise the tower is just an afterthought, the structure cannot be made more prominent than the other stronger elements within the composition. You can try a bit of dodging and burning to create a sense of relief against the sky but it will never dominant the scene or even compare to the patterns and tones of the bridge. Well I should never say "never".

[Manfred M]

Let me put a completely different point of view forward here. The bridge structure creates leading lines that draws the viewer's eyes towards the tower. This is the way that a landscape image should work, where the photographer uses compositional tools to lead the viewer's eyes through the image.

I personally find that the pruned tree in the original image adds to the composition as it nicely mirrors the flat top of the tower, so from a compositional standpoint. I like what has happened with those two elements.

The way that the image has been composed results in the tower being a small, secondary element. The way the composition works here, the image is more about the bridge than anything else. The various crops attempt to accentuate the tower, but it remains a fairly minor player, regardless of the crop. I agree a longer focal length would flatten the perspective, but it would also magnify the image, requiring a smaller aperture to keep everything in focus.

I also like the amount of sky in the first image; it provides more colour balance than the crop does, where the amount of blue goes down drastically.

What caught my eye in the first one is how the point of view you used put a lot of trees on the left hand side of the image and so few on the right hand side. I'm not certain that this is working as well as it could and stepping a bit to the let might give you a stronger composition.

With the incremental cost of each image being nothing, I suggest you try a photographic technique known as "working the scene" where you deliberately take a number of different shots of this scene, varying your shooting position, focal length, aperture, etc. to see how these impact the final image. I find that 5 - 10 shots is usually what I will do in this type of shooting situation.

[NorthernFocus]

Nicely composed. I agree that stump of a tree is unfortunate but you did well otherwise.

[Rufus]

Thank you everyone for your helpful comments, they are really appreciated.

I have incorporated the suggestions as best I can up to post #12.

So, I have cropped the sides as suggested, slightly amended the bottom crop and changed the crop at the top so that it is the most cropping that still allows no sky above the pruned tree.

I have darkened the water in the river on the left to reduce its impact, darkened the tower and introduced some implied shade on the right of the tower.

The white border on the original was a mistake in two senses as it (a) was unintentional and (b) does not work, I agree! Hopefully it will not be there when this version appears.



David

[Rufus]

Nicely composed. I agree that stump of a tree is unfortunate but you did well otherwise.

Thank you, Dan.

David

[Rufus]

Thank you for commenting Manfred and suggesting an alternative critique.

"I personally find that the pruned tree in the original image adds to the composition as it nicely mirrors the flat top of the tower, so from a compositional standpoint I like what has happened with those two elements." - I had not noticed this aspect!

"The image is more about the bridge than anything else" - Yes, that was my thought originally, but when adding the title I thought about the lines leading to the tower and concluded that leading lines presumably should lead to the subject. So I hedged my bets and added the folly tower to the title!

"I also like the amount of sky in the first image; it provides more colour balance than the crop does, where the amount of blue goes down drastically." - The original crop placed both the horizon and the tower on an approximate "third". I did not consciously consider colour balance at the time but that is something I will try to bare in mind in future.

"the point of view you used put a lot of trees on the left hand side of the image and so few on the right hand side. I'm not certain that this is working as well as it could and stepping a bit to the left might give you a stronger composition." - There was less by way of trees or bushes on the right, and I was trying to avoid a symmetrical view over the bridge so the point of view was consciously chosen, albeit I agree it was not as successful as one would have liked in balancing the image left/right.

David

[Geoff F]

When considering various crop options, David, you could try this simple technique. Take some pieces of card and hold over the screen to simulate potential crops.

[Kathy O]

Thank you Geoff. Is this what you had in mind?



The sky that is lost was not that interesting so that is actually no loss at all. I took a little of the foreground away too, and darkened the tower as Brian suggested. This version gives greater prominence to the bridge as well as the tower. Somehow losing the top of the thick trunk helps it recede. I suppose that is because the eye is less inclined to follow the trunk skywards. I am surprised how much change in the compositional construction results from so little cropping.

David

Really like this crop!

[Rufus]

When considering various crop options, David, you could try this simple technique. Take some pieces of card and hold over the screen to simulate potential crops.

Thank you for sharing the idea, Geoff. I have done this with prints, and do somthing similar when viewing projected digital images at my local club, but its a bit fiddly to keep in one place on a screen so I have tended to use the crop preview instead. Maybe I will make some L-shapes from waste mount board and give it another go.

David