I wonder

[MiniChris]

if this is one of those shots only the shooter will ever "get," and be pleased with...



I've made this same shot and presented it at least three times on this forum and it never seems to generate any particular interest..really more a polite ho-hum, and now I think I am to that point of understanding; some shots will only be special to the shooter, no matter how much they think it is a "great" shot...

I've seen this phenomena in other shots posted to the Mini Comps and know, while they do absolutely nothing for me, whoever posted them was quite satisfied with the results.

I also wonder, if within this self-satisfation mode, the degree of satisfaction is directly related to the degree of shooting and post-production experience. I should have stayed in bed...too much wondering going on this morning.

[Donald]

I have to confess to not having seen this image before, for which I apologise.

There probably is something to the point that, at times, only the creator of the image will feel very positive about his/her creation. Conversely, we also get those moments when others see something positive that the creator has not.

There's also the bit about getting to know our marketplace (not thinking about this site particularly). I am sure that there are many people making images to sell that understand their market very well and know what to produce that will meet demand.

So to this image. For the purpose of discussion can I split it in two; i.e. draw a horizontal line across the middle?

The top half is very nice. Nothing that particularly shakes the earth for me, but nice. And, it should be said, the bottom needs the top half to make the whole image: It balances the bottom half.

The bottom half is magnificent. The light on the trees and on the water is beautiful. If I wanted to give myself a bit of extra work (although I understand the latest Photoshop does it in all sorts of whizz-bang, clever ways), it would be to clone out those branches creeping in on the middle right.

So, for me, it's a winner. I think in would have said this before if I had seen it (apologies again).

[ilovelucydog]

It's a nice shot, Chris. Sometimes, I think, we forget who we really ARE shooting for. Obviously, to you, that is either a special place, or holds a memory or something... I'm not a technical shooter and when I worry about what others will say or think about my image it takes away that something special that it held for me. I like CiC because of the ideas and inspiration, but I'm such a wuss when it comes to critique that I don't post much. My images are memories for me... a little piece of time that is now forever gone.

So, what is it about that spot, tree, area that makes you keep going back to it and capturing it?

[jeeperman]

Chris, I also had not seen this before. I do like it as the lighting here is nice. I have to agree with Donald about the cloning the branches coming in from the right. Without those I think the shot would better show the significance of the stand alone towering tree over the smaller bunch. Those few branches for me suggest there are other large trees.

[Jo Brown]

Chris sometimes I wonder too. Nice shot, I must say. Beautiful tree and stunning light. As a viewer, for me the story is not the tree but rather the surroundings - I want to find a way into the landscape so that I can experience it because it is very evocative.

Good work.

[cthermans]

My pictures are done for me and my family and they all hold memories. I think what stands out for me is the bare branch that seems to be reaching outwards or up to the other branches possibly wanting the beautiful green that the smaller tree on the right has or the branches above the bare branch.

[MiniChris]

It's a nice shot, Chris. Sometimes, I think, we forget who we really ARE shooting for. Obviously, to you, that is either a special place, or holds a memory or something... I'm not a technical shooter and when I worry about what others will say or think about my image it takes away that something special that it held for me. I like CiC because of the ideas and inspiration, but I'm such a wuss when it comes to critique that I don't post much. My images are memories for me... a little piece of time that is now forever gone.

There's nothing particularly sentimental about this spot, it is more about capturing the light at that particular time of day, (+/- 30 minutes before sunset). There is a two to three minute window when the light is just "right." However, it seems I concentrated on getting the light right without giving concern to the wghole image...I will take everyone's advice about the stray limbs and make well...thnaks!

So, what is it about that spot, tree, area that makes you keep going back to it and capturing it?

[MiniChris]

That was weird...whatever I posted didn't come through...only said that there is a 2-3 minute window where the light is just right, from the top of the tree to the waterline...then's it's gone. I love the essence of capturing 'that" moment. Now, back to the drawing board to get rid of the non-essential twigs, etc.

[ktuli]

Chris,

I think a lot of times we put more value on our photos because of the story behind them. Not necessarily the story we're trying to tell with the photo, but more the story of capturing the shot.

For example, I took a photo of a frog that I really love. It is generally well received, but I certainly find that people like it a lot more when I tell the story of how I got the shot by walking up a mountain stream for a couple hours, finally finding this frog hiding in a spot which caused me to stand in knee deep water and hold the camera at water level without being able to look through the view finder and taking probably 15 different shots before I got the composition I wanted. Either way, the photo really is probably a mediocre photo at best, but it still means a lot to me.

I don't know if that's the case with this one, but it certainly makes me want to ask - what's the story behind that shot?

According to the old saying, 'a picture is worth a thousand words' so I think you better get typing...

- Bill

[Clactonian]

Chris, I have noticed a similar pattern to that you describe on other forum (fora, forums, whatever), and in particular those with a larger, active, worldwide membership. The number of comments is, not surprisingly, in direct proportion to time you post in relation to the time zone with the most active membership. Post at a time that everybody else is and your shot quickly moves off the radar.
I have noticed it here at CiC which has grown enormously over the last few months with a much wider membership. There was a time when virtually every post attracted plenty of comment whereas now I have experienced a competition winning post that passed with barely a glance.
That's not a criticism but a simple fact of life in my book.
There are tricks you can play of course to keep it in the public eye for longer by subtle (!!) edits, thanks to anybody that comments and so on ....... and no I wouldn't dream of doing so!
And as for your shot, which I must confess passed me by, I can do no better than concur with the Scottish maestro.

[Wirefox]

Chris,

I think it is only natural that we should strive to capture a scene that stirs deep feeling in ourselves. Transmitting that feeling or emotion to others is the most difficult part of photography. It is very easy to create emotional triggers for ourselves since we can view the image through a singular filter that we carry around in our gadget bags - a filter that distorts the image into our own consciousness.

Some subjects are much harder than others to turn into a broadcasting transmitter of our personal feelings at the time of capturing the scene. Your tree is a difficult subject but I could see immediately why you found the scene worthy of capture. The light reminded me of certain times of day in the woods near where I lived as a kid. I could smell the woodsmoke from our fires and the solitary blackbird warning of our approach. I know that sound all a bit wet a gooey but I think it illustrates a point. The emotions that the image stirred in me were nothing like the emotions you felt when viewing the scene. To me this is the whole point of photography as an art. The image does not have to convey the exact conscious state of the artist at the time of capture - what it must do is trigger emotion - the stronger the better. In my opinion a good photograph must be as personal to the viewer as it is to the artist and always for different reasons. A good photographer will recognise certain common triggers within the scene and accentuate them to steer the viewer but in the end it is down to the viewers own experience how the image is final 'felt'.

The problem is that when we are asking for C&C on a forum full of photographers, we will - in the main - receive a technical appraisal - less often we get an emotional reaction. That is why I will sometime provide C&C by saying that an image transcends technical achievement - because regardless of its technical imperfections the image catches the back of the throat.

In this case your image sits somewhere between gratuitous capture (the "I take photos for me" side of the house) and transmittable consciousness (the artistic side of the house) The subject matter makes it very difficult to accentuate the essence of what made you stop and take in this scene. Katy had exactly the same issues with some winter trees she posted a few months back. She was seeing most wonderous things in the frosted trees but the images were not transmitting that vision.

[Wirefox]

I can do no better than concur with the Scottish maestro.

Mike, I know Donald is slow getting images off the memory card and on to the forum - but comparing him to British Leyland is a bit much I think the analogy is more toward the bloke in greasy blue overalls and a flat cap who produces finely tuned British sports cars in his garden shed.

[Clactonian]

I think the analogy is more toward the bloke in greasy blue overalls and a flat cap who produces finely tuned British sports cars in his garden shed.

... and wearing a sporran?

[arith]

It has got something that grabs you. It is hard to explain, I have seen it but I don't comment much about any image unless I think I've got something useful to say or I think the photographer needs encouragement; especially if somebody has already said what I was thinking.

It must be satisfying to break all the so called rules and end up with a pleasing image.

[MiniChris]

This is my remake...better, the same, worse???

[PopsPhotos]

To tell the truth, I like the first better, but the difference in "like level" is pretty slight.

The camera never truely captures what we see, because we "see" with more than just the eyes. Every picture is evocative to the photographer. When the photographer goes back to a particular picture, those additional senses will be called back to mind. Every viewer will have different feelings evoked when viewing that picture.

Somewhere in the dark recesses of her storage, my daughter has a picture of the stage coach at Scotty's Castle in Death Valley. Kodacolor ASA 25, shot with a Brownie Hawkeye in the early 50s and very faded with time. To most people it is a ho-hum at best. To me, it is a picture of Andy Devine clowning around inside the coach, making me laugh.

Pops

[jeeperman]

Hey Chris, i have to say I like the first better as well. This one seems a tad oversharpened. Also the branches that I think would make a difference for me are the few coming in from the side just below the end of the large dead branch. I do really like the light on this and so much so that it got me looking at trees all day!

[Markvetnz]

Ditto above - first is lovely. Second IMO is oversharpened - too much edge detail.

[MiniChris]

Did overshapren...realized that when I saw it again...ooops...so, went back to the drawing board and it's a toss-up (IMO) as to which reigns supreme over the other, but I am sure you lads and lasses will form your own opinions, and I'd like to hear them.

[jeeperman]

Everyone has one and mine is...... this last edit is now my favorite Chris. Now that tree seems to stand in grandure over the rest of the forrest. Good work.