* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #880 / Revived #100 (ONE HUNDRED) on 2025 02 26*

Why should they be the same?

One is a reflection of the light, which radiates from the water as the light reflects. You will only see the light that is traveling on or near a direct line with the sun and the observer.

The other is the absence of light reflecting caused by an object blocking the light, which is consistent with a direct line between the sun and the object.

Move the position of the observer and the position of the reflection changes relative to the position of the observer, it changes it's position on the ground but remains on or near a straight line between the sun and the observer. The shadow remains consistent with the position of the rock and the sun and it's position remains constant on the ground regardless of the camera position, though it's relative angle in the 2D image will depend on camera position.

What the text is describing whets the appetite for the photo but the photo itself doesn't convey this to me. I feel there is too much in the image and not enough of it is the view. Perhaps try taking off the entire upper walkway immediately above the metal structure on the middle walkway and a little below the lower walkway. You'd keep enough walkways to make the point about them and the view would become more apparent in the shot.

Plenty of horizontal lines to support the panorama proportions. The foreground space is justified because it makes clear that all the white stuff in the mid ground is snow.
The east/west line of optimistically warm toned brollies, each with its cap of snow is a visual witty pleasure.
I think you got yhe proportions of space to each of the horizontal bands across the image, exactly right. Each adds useful information but leaves the umbrella strip dominant.

I think it is because the beach has a slope whereas the water is level.

Thank you for your comment. I genuinly appreciate you taking the time to give feedback. I can totally see where you're coming from given the description I made. However, I think I didn't articulate what I love about this photo particularly well and focused too much on the view in my description.
This isn't a foto of the view, but a foto of the structure, which just happens to have a breathtaking view in the background. I disagree that it would be improved by cutting off the top row, as it gives the image the scale necessary to convey how tall the structure is and that it is a continous spiral going upwards. The view in the backround, I think, acts more like necessary context, placing this structure on top of a mountain, rather than the star of the show.

This is a kind of image i really like.We have warm and cold tones, we have an interesting situation, a nice main subject and no ugly goblins in the way. Instead we have traces of people. So, well observed and a reminder about always bring the camera.

The image is either well done or somewhat lacking - that depends on what the idea of taking the image was/is. For a snap - everything is fine. For something else, a detailed documentary type of image or an image supposed to be printed at around 1 meter/ 3 feet width it is lacking. So, I guess it is a snap but I also think it deserves another destiny.

So, here comes personal ideas.
I would crop away parts of the image. From start I would remove most of the foreground. When looking at the image in bigger format we don't really need the bottom part to identify the snowy situation. Then after that a part of the sky can be cropped away. Not as much as this time. Depending on the mood the sky may gain (or not) from a little more structure.
I did all that and got this (cropped at the sides - this is just for clarification):

There are three places marked on the image. I don't know what went wrong but when opening your attached image and checking it there are several places where there is a kind of color phenomena around strong contrasty things. Something with the conversion from RAW to JPG? Or JPG compression? Anyway, it should be an easy fix with another conversion which would make it fully possible to print this image pretty wide!

I see a very wide lens came to use. The best approach would of course be using a longer lens and take say four images and stitch them. Waste less pixels, get more details and less of the noise.
Well, as you understand i really liked this and I think it is fine whatever use of the image you make.

This is hard. Can I be blunt? I think I have to.
The images are presented as vacation snaps. That's OK of course. If we travel we all get a large amount of these. But then you mention you don't remember what you took. Keeping that in mind (!) while looking at the images they suddenly loose value altogether.
Was the place at the water at those flat cliffs a special place for you? What about the golden dolphins... did it happen something there? If so the images would have been something to look at later and perhaps laugh at or an important shared memory or something!

Now I don't know why they are there. If they don't mean anything to you maybe consider deleting them. I'm sure you got other and better images from the journey.
That's rough and it feel a bit strange to write this comment as I really think one should be positive. Maybe I am missing something?

OK, I see, and there you go. I'm sorry and I'll stay in the corner repeating "Don't be blunt " for a while.

I really like the festive atmosphere here.
That large instrument (tuba? I am worthless at recognizing instrument) feels like black hole, sucking us into the image.
Getting close to the action definitely paid off here.
What it also looks like, that same instrument, is like a eye pointing straight ahead, guiding the guy playing it.
And that is a good thing, because that guy himself is not watching the road, but the photographer.
The eye contact is a bonus.

This B&W feels classic, the lone figure well placed for scale.
Your description makes me want to see the whole tower. it must be huge with that diameter.

The ratio works well here: it emphasizes the long stretch of open umbrellas, all just about coinciding with the distant horizon.
Sun-umbrellas and snow make for an interesting, almost ironic combination.
The bicycle reinforces the surreality of the scene.

Great story and photo - it's quirky and fun and colorful with multiple contradictory elements: kids in colorful plastic boats paddling vigorously about the murky pool, the "Taj" with its leaning utility pole, and my favorite part, the rusty corrugated tin panels with sideways graffiti. None of it fits, but together its impact is beyond the sum of its parts.

Colorful and energetic travel photo, looks almost as if it could have come from one of my favorite movies, A Passage To India, Except for the stray tennis shoe showing amid the marchers. Great expressions on the faces, and hints distributed throughout about where it is shot. Nice image.

A rather incredible and massive structure, Your image captures its delicate geometry and the monochrome version reveals the contrast between the sharp architectural features and the foggy (and romantic) background of the mountainous countryside. There are many lines to guide us visually and they all work. But there is one impediment, the large dark box on the left upper thirds intersection, and that is an eye magnet that sucks my attention away from the more delicate elements. I tried a crop that would at least limit its force, and had the extra benefit of making the lone figure more important.

Having never been to China, I don't know those dolphins so I'll stick to the first image. A pleasing and well balanced image of two rock features sandwiched between two shoulders of greenery. The colors are subtler than I'd expect so I'm assuming the weather was overcast. I think I might raise the shadows a bit in the darks to keep them from blocking up, particularly that lower set.