Never dispose of your RAW files

[Donald]

We all know (don't we?) never to dump the RAW files. Here is a case in point.

This one was captured in 2015. It was an okay image, but not one that I would show to the world. Well, yesterday, I was talking to someone about my images from the Assynt area of Scotland and was just quietly wandered through the old files ... until I came across this file.

I now know more about finishing an image (post-processing) than I did back in 2015. This is what emerged.

If you want to tell me that it is still pretty awful, that's fine, but I like it. What do you think?

[Shadowman]

I like the upper two thirds of the image, the horizontal line so close to the viewers vision has a feeling of obstruction. It would be more interesting if you could somehow create a sense of an abyss between the foreground and the midground rock formation.

[JBW]

As an ex lighthouse keeper I am biased. But when I scroll the shot down to hide the grass it takes on an entirely different feeling.

I'd play with the amount of foreground in the shot.

[Cogito]

I think I agree with Brian, crop the foreground?

[Donald]

But that makes it not square.

[NorthernFocus]

I like the processing and agree with others about losing the FG. Excellent detail on the lighthouse.

[JBW]

But that makes it not square.

It can still be square:

[Donald]

That takes away the cliff edge.

[JBW]

Very true but it is square

[Manfred M]

But that makes it not square.

If the format is having a negative impact on your image, perhaps it is time to eliminate that constraint. At least for this shot.

[Donald]

If the format is having a negative impact on your image, perhaps it is time to eliminate that constraint. At least for this shot.

I know.

The fact is that the image needs, in my opinion, the foreground. It's what you wrote in an earlier thread about feeling the image, not just what may a technically better image.

[MrB]

After previous comments, I have the feeling that my opinion won't matter, but the foreground also feels distracting to me. The cropped image feels much better - in fact, I don't understand why it has to be square and I'd make it a 10 by 8 crop. It also feels to have more depth, both vertical and 3D, if the cliff is revealed with a slight lightening of the tones in that area.

Philip

[Donald]

After previous comments, I have the feeling that my opinion won't matter,

Why so? Your opinion matters as much as anyone else's. The fact that I like the composition is what matters to me. Anyone else is allowed to disagree with me.

[Rufus]

I like the the foreground in the original image because it gives additional context and includes the ragged coastline from which the subject is protecting the local shipping and sailors.

The sky is the part that I am less enamoured with because it comes across as of it were the Northen Lights in monochrome; but I am gusessing it is the result of clouds moving during a long exposure on a breezy night. It is a little over-dramatic for my personal taste.

[JBW]

I know.

The fact is that the image needs, in my opinion, the foreground. It's what you wrote in an earlier thread about feeling the image, not just what may a technically better image.

And that truly is the ultimate reality. This is your shot and how you feel about it is important.

[mugge]

I like the composition but every element is so clearly differentiated that I find it lacks the fluid transition between the elements we have been accustomed to in your other images. It is very different.

Cheers Ole

[DanK]

Good you didn't discard this. I like the image. My first reaction was a bit like Philip's, but after returning to the images, I decided that for my tastes, Philip's edit doesn't work because it makes the building stand out less.

I'm in the pro-cropping camp. Particularly when I enlarge the image by putting it in the lytebox, I find the bottom section distracting. I don't perceive it as part of the same design; instead, I find my eyes flickering back and forth between that and the building--in short, a distraction.

Why should it be square?

[proseak]

I like it "as is", and think that it would look best printed BIG - A0 or larger, with the LH at eye level.

[billtils]

"Latest threads" won't load for me since late last night. There is a work-around and I've gone through the comments here. It strikes me what we have here is a collection of very acceptable alternatives, in which case the conclusion has to be "to each their own". I like them all but Donald's original leaps off the page more on first glance as far as I'm concerned.

[skitterbug]

From a more inexperienced perspective, my reaction is maybe crop a fraction of the foreground but leave most of it. The structure that the lighthouse sits upon needs the definition, otherwise it just looks like a pile of 'whatever'.

I really like the blends of grey/blacks and the focus of the light on the lighthouse - as it should be! A beacon in the night!