Farmer's Market Field

[Katy Noelle]

#1



#2



#3



#4



I've been wishing, just lately that I was a newbie, again. Oh, for the good ol' days when ignorance was bliss and I was so proud of everything that I did. Take me back to when i felt "no pressure". I think that I'm in some awkward adolescent photographer stage. I just want to keep learning, though; so, let me have it (), if you would be so kind. ahem, I mean, C&C, please. Thank you! I always appreciate the time people take to help.

Each of these is a separate photo with room to crop. I'm having a hard time telling what is level - sorry that they all look a bit different that way. Also, I'm still, obviously, working on what I see in post processing. If there's anything I should know...you would tell me, right?

[ktuli]

Katy,

Remember - Mark's chart will explain that feeling you're having about wanting to go back to being a newbie.

As for C&C...

#1 - I would crop a little tighter from the bottom. Maybe take out a third of the field. The huge expanse of brown is just a little overwhelming. It is a shame it wasn't a nice blue sky, then it would be easier to crop more field and leave more sky in.

#2 - Oddly, I think in the B&W, the crop is just fine, but I would bring up the contrast a bit, and also bring up the black slider a little as well. Just so you get a little more distinct lines in the shot, and a better feel for things. As it stands now, that B&W tends to be too much flat grey for my tastes. Or maybe sepia tone?

#3 & #4 - Sorry, I personally am not a fan of those branches. I understand what you were trying to do with them, but for whatever reason, they're not working for me. Perhaps there are too many of them? Particularly the ones on the right that are just branches coming into the frame and there's no sense of the main trunk. In #3, the dark heads of the center branches are producing the kind of contrast I think #2 needs. And even in the farmhouse you see that more distinct contrast in #3, but it is missing in #2.

Of the four, I think #2 is my favorite.

- Bill

[Donald]

I'm broadly in line with Bill in terms of his comments.

For me the subject matter is much better suited to the B & W treatment (but I'm biased!). So, on the basis that, a) I think that and, b) I'm not so keen on the branches coming into #4, let me talk about #2, which I like very much.

I don't there is anything negative to say about the conversion and the design of the image. However, I don't think the definition in the foreground field is strong enough to carry the amount of space it occupies in the frame. What I mean is that there is a lot of field in the picture. Given that, it's got to really be a striking feature of the image.

There are lines that take us back into the image. But I'm not sure that they're strong enough. If (and it is not in your control), it had just been ploughed and we had very strongly defined lines, then I think that would have made for a stronger image. I'm thinking of something like my own Preparing the Ground, from the old days when I used black borders!

[Shadowman]

It's hard to tell what's level in these photographs. Also, were you standing on level ground?

[ilovelucydog]

It is hard to tell what is level, Katy. Regardless, they all portray rural New England very well. I do like the last one... I like the contrast in color that the branches bring and also, to me it looks like what we would see while driving on a rural VT road. Good eye, Katy.

[Katy Noelle]

Thanks for your feedback! I'm off to take some photos before it's too lat in the morning and I'll come back and respond later.

I'll just mention the "level". Of course, this being Vermont, the ground isn't level at all. I was trying to take it off of the building but look at that barn. Then, look at the middle house, then, look at the front house. It's hopeless.

[MiniChris]

I looked at all the comments and then applied some of them to your first image, though doing some color/saturation correction and a few spot dodging/burnings to assist in pushing the eye toward the house and barn and not to the field. I would tend to agree there isn't enough sky to work with, which limits the editing capabilities to fore and side areas.

I like working with other people's images because it makes me appreciate another's visual imitation...I can't wait to get up there and burn through a zillion images of the NE countryside.

[Geoff F]

Well you have raised several issues here, Katy.

Firstly, I think the colour versions work best because they show the natural soil colours. The B&W seems to me somewhat stark and desolate, like an abandoned farm and buildings.

Donald's example, I suggest, works well because of the tractor in the foreground. Take that away and you have a totally different scene.

With regard to what is level. My method is to consider both horizontal and vertical lines then decide which is most important even if it isn't exactly correct. Incidentally, I'm from a very hilly part of the UK where there just isn't a natural level line to be found anywhere.

With your first photo, I would say that there are 2 options for this scene; the one you have shot and zooming in closer to the farm buildings as an alternative.

I see what Bill means about those branches in the second photo. They do considerably 'shorten' that field, but do they add anything else to the scene?

Going back to the beginning is something which often seems appealing to life in general as well as photography; but in many ways, I would still like to retain what I have learned.

Yes, self pressure and criticism can be a problem. Initially I photographed everything and was proud of the majority of my photos. Now, I often just look at a scene, shake my head and walk past.

In order to try to get more relaxed about my 'hobby', I have decided, for now, not to enter any competitions or anything else with a 'stress factor' and just photograph what and when suits me. Apart from my insect photos where I shoot for identification and need to regularly 'patrol' the same areas and note the changes.

Searching through all those insect ID books can also be a bit of a task, but there isn't any deadline; and now, I don't really care if someone else spots a rare species before me. And I spend quite a bit of time on a wildlife site helping others with their sightings.

[Geoff F]

As you said, Katy, nothing is level so what is straight.



Donald isn't the only one who photographs tractors.

This was actually just a quick test shot for my Sigma 150-500 lens. The tractor is more than half a mile away.

[Katy Noelle]

Thank you, thank you for all of your very helpful input.

Chris, I love the edit!

Geoff, that photo is so funny - you understand the whole "nothing's straight" concept, then. I love that part of Vermont. I just didn't want to "concern" anyone about my horizons.

I'll work on this later. Tonight is my mom's birthday party and tomorrow is Mother's Day.

[PedroMChavez]

here is what I did.
I put it in black and white and just did the horizon in color, then I put a Gaussian blur on the field and those branches. All in all I was just having fun with your picture.

[MiniChris]

Thank you, thank you for all of your very helpful input.

Chris, I love the edit!

Geoff, that photo is so funny - you understand the whole "nothing's straight" concept, then. I love that part of Vermont. I just didn't want to "concern" anyone about my horizons.

I'll work on this later. Tonight is my mom's birthday party and tomorrow is Mother's Day.

I went in a 200% and found the verticals and horizontals to be dead-on..regardless of the terrain, if you have a building in the scene, you can always find level ground.