In the Jungle

I have been watching the thread on Viewfinder with a lot of interest. I have not been on the Critique forum a great deal lately but have always found it to be a very good place to get honest feed back on my photos. If I am pleased with an image I probably would not post it here. However I am posting this photo because it's one I would like to work but I'm not sure if it does. I am interested in your opinion on the composition and overall contend. Is it interesting enough does it have a strong enough main subject does the DOF work? Please feel free to tell me what you think.

I like the feel of the photo, but the two large blurs in the foreground are a little too distracting for my taste. I'm not sure how well it'd work if you cropped those out, but I'd guess it's worth a shot.

I like the shot as well but I do not find that the blurred foreground is all that much of a distraction. Just covering the blurs with my hand as if to crop them out takes away from the image as a whole and almost centers the horizon line behind it. Other than that I can't offer any solutions to the blurs... just that I like it and the DOF seems fine to me .

Hey Larry...I love the DOF on this, and the foreground objects notwithstanding it's a well composed shot. My only nitpick are the two shutes sticking out of the top of the milkweed. Clone those out and you have a winner. Excellent exposure, by the way. Tack sharp!:)
John

Thanks John, Jaedon and Skyline for the comments and the suggestions for improvement. I tried to implement your ideas as best I could. Hope this is a better image.

Looks great Larry!

i like the original composition and angle, and I think the framing in the second one is weaker than the first, but I do have to agree that the oof *weeds* detract from the real subject.

Hey...

I think you just need to take out the 3rd shute as well.... and keep the original crop....

the front out of focuse elements i believe add to the image rather than take away from it... it is a very nice perspective....

It would have been nice if you could pluck them out instead of clone them out, but hey...

Marc

Ahhh, the first signs of spring! :) That alone makes it a good subject. (needs to go into this month's project)

I like the crop but don't feel the cloning was necessary because the dof already lessened that problem. I'm not as bothered by the oof foreground blobs in the cropped version but still wish they weren't there.

Careful when getting down and up from those groundlevel shots, oldtimer. :)

Edit: Oh yeah, since I haven't run this shot down enough yet, try burining in the upper left corner a bit...

Thanks to each of you for taking the time to share your ideas about this photo. It was very much an experiment and I think that it works more than fails so I am pleased with the results overall. My intent was to get out of focus foreground object and still not sure if I over did it or not. As to those distracting stickup in the back...I try never to alter a scene by rearranging or moving things. But now here I am cloning them out. What does that say about me??? At any rate I do appreciate the time an effort you guys took to analyze this image.

And Chunk I can't tell you how many shots I've passed up for just that reason. How will I look or can I even get up once I'm down where I need to be for the shot. Oh and thanks for reminding me about the Spring Project.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old Timer

As to those distracting stickup in the back...I try never to alter a scene by rearranging or moving things. But now here I am cloning them out. What does that say about me???

---

Hey, I read that Ansel Adams once shocked some observers by going into a scene he was shooting and tearing down some inconvenient branches. When asked about altering nature he said something like nature had it wrong there and he was just helping it along...
I wouldn't worry about it, it's much less damage than say ...golfing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chunk

Hey, I read that Ansel Adams once shocked some observers by going into a scene he was shooting and tearing down some inconvenient branches. When asked about altering nature he said something like nature had it wrong there and he was just helping it along...
I wouldn't worry about it, it's much less damage than say ...golfing.

---

Now that's a story I never heard before. I guess I won't worry so much about moving that Dixie cup out of the scene or removing a dead leaf anymore. Thanks Chunk.

removing the offending objects first makes more sense then trying to get rid of them afterwards.. he he

course the real skill is knowing they are offending objects before one takes the picture.. Ansel quite clearly did.. and sensibly removed them..:)

trog

ps.. still a nice image by the way.. it would just be better without the foreground things in the way..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trog100

removing the offending objects first makes more sense then trying to get rid of them afterwards.. he he

course the real skill is knowing they are offending objects before one takes the picture.. Ansel quite clearly did.. and sensibly removed them..:)

trog

ps.. still a nice image by the way.. it would just be better without the foreground things in the way..

---

If I had AA's eyes and talent I would have known what nature had done wrong as well. Thanks for the look and comment.

Great subject,Larry. The original crop i like best, as brent stated. I like the editing out of the unwanted shutes behind the subject. The lighting and exposure is great on this. The blur in the fg sort of creates a framing vignetting type of effect and so i would leave it alone.
Thanks Chunk for the little Ansel Adams story. I was still feeling guilty about the many times that I have ripped, cut, chopped, blew-up and/or excavated an area with my handy John Deere just to get the right effect.
Good shootin, Larry

I've been following this and learning from the comments. I, too, like the blurred foreground and background but now I'm beginning to want Weyerhauser to do some clear cutting so I can get Mt. Rainier shots easier. ;-)

it most likely comes down to not having a macro lens and not being able to get close enough to the subject in this case thow.. purely a guess based on the 50mm focal length.. a nice 50mm prime perhaps..??

trog

It was with the 28-70 f2.8. I had a macro back in the camera bag, but was a little ways a way while on a walk and I spotted this first dandelion puff of the season. Just couldn't pass it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gahspidy

Thanks Chunk for the little Ansel Adams story. I was still feeling guilty about the many times that I have ripped, cut, chopped, blew-up and/or excavated an area with my handy John Deere just to get the right effect.

---

That sounds like expected behavior from someone suspected of carrying old oil drums along on his photo excursions...:D

(haven't seen any can shots lately...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gahspidy

Great subject,Larry. The original crop i like best, as brent stated. I like the editing out of the unwanted shutes behind the subject. The lighting and exposure is great on this. The blur in the fg sort of creates a framing vignetting type of effect and so i would leave it alone.
Thanks Chunk for the little Ansel Adams story. I was still feeling guilty about the many times that I have ripped, cut, chopped, blew-up and/or excavated an area with my handy John Deere just to get the right effect.
Good shootin, Larry

---

Thanks Gary for taking the time to review this photo. The blur creating a vignetting effect was something that I had thought about when I did the original. I kind of like the extra blur over the cropped version.

I heard PS was coming out with a chain saw plug in.LOL. I have been known to break a limb or two myself Larry. Nice picture Larry.
Greg