Watching the aftermath of a nice sunset from the porch swing, I decided to experiment with the new Adobe camera phone ap for iPhones which seems to be named Pi but some refer to it as Indigo. It's very "computational" in a way that is supposed to make phone photos look more like those taken with "real" cameras, less artifacts, less flat, less plastic-y. Right now it's free. So far I am liking it but still a novice with it. Still prefer my real camera, but it is a lot better than what I was getting with the native camera ap, especially in extreme ranges of lighting like this. I took photos with my camera, too, with regular settings and in HDR mode, and even with careful editing, neither of them came out as good as the Pi image.
I discovered some delightful abstracts on the walls of a Berlin museum, but not on the inside, on the outside. In fact they were under a bridge and changing by the second. There were two of them alongside each other, spirit shapes dancing over the stone, one silver and one gold.
Silver Spirits
Golden Spirits
Making of..
And this one is straight out of camera, just to illustrate the entire scene. It could make an image in itself, but is very busy and would need some thought.
Compositionally, it's the repetition of horizontal layers, all of much the same size, that builds the image. Sky, clouds, mountains, forest, buildings and then the foreground. The peak like shapes of the white buildings reference similar shapes on the mountains and draw everything together.
I can't believe that the distilleries of Scotland qualify as "Hidden." Still (pun alert), I understand why you felt you should visit and include them.
That's a tough question. I'd go for 2. I like the way the waterfall shape is continued through the rocks below and I think this connection works better in the portrait format of 2 than it does in the square format and somewhat different angle of 4. I'd take a small bit off the top edge of 2 however so the vertical line of falls to rocks ran almpost the height of the shot.
As Chris has said. Although it is dark, there's enough detail in the garden for it to be easily appreciated. Then the contrast with the fiery sky between the garden and the sky becomes the point of the image. The cloud spectacle is beautifully positioned by the trees to show the clouds lighting to advantage while creating a line that makes the connection to the garden.
Can I conclude Chris that you live in a city? In Australia, that's how I expect livestock to behave. Cattle, sheep - they definitely like company, especially when there's a water hole.
I like the white road slicing across the top left and linking the water areas of the image. As the cattle are of a similar colour, the road/cattle work to link up the image.
Thanks for including the third shot revealing the scene you were working with. Looking at how a photographer made their choices is always illuminating. The parallelograms of light in 3 must have had you headscratching re how to use it in part or whole. Having seen 3, I'd have been tempted to use more of it than the corner, bottom left in 1 and 2.
Your title is significant when seen with the photos. It locks in the interpretation that we are looking at spirits and then the idea that there might be gold and silver spirits pushes our interpretation further.
The "spirits" feel as though they are coming from the bottom left corner. They are set free and spreading out. It adds drama to the shots.
This is one of those subjects where our response is probably conditioned by our culture. Beach access is a sensitive subject in Australia. My immediate outrage at the content kind of overwhelms thoughts of colour and shape and dof etc.
Even so, the photographs settings have helped to induce the response. Lots of dof takes us from the foreground to the sliver of ocean behind. All the vertical lines from top to bottom multiply the feeling of enclosure. The little piece of balcony that intrudes even further into the space, ices the cake.
Let me guess.
Could this be in Pompeï?
I know that some ot the streets there have these elevated large boulders that used to help the Roman Citizens cross the street (like a modern zebra crossing, but elevated in order to keep feet out of running water, mud, excrement and whatnot. And inbetween the boulders you can see how a constant succession of countless carts with wooden and metal-enforced wheels have left traces.
Only...I don't think that those worn-out tracks would be this regular.
So I am intrigued.
(Photographically it is not your most exciting offering, but I value it more as an historical quiz question.)
This is an interesting look into the photographer's kitchen and how he has arrived at the final composition.
I always like that kind of exercize (It is one of the reasons why I treasure the Magnum book "Contact Sheets", showing the discarded images that were shot before and often also after the iconic Magnum images that we all know. You can almost see and feel the photographer's brain processing the scene and working towards the best vantage point, perspective and focal length (when using zoom, which is not often: most of these contact sheets were from prime lenses).)
Choosing between #1 and #2 is easy : #2 is clearly the better one. The inclusion of the "stepping stone" rocks in the near foreground is good (it invites the viewer to literally step into the scene, which creates immersion). Both images have that, but the first one has that foreground rock cut off awkwardly. Having it in the scene completely is much better.
By contrast, #3 is less immersive. The waterfall is zoomed in closer and one could argue that it shows the waterfall thus better, but I would disagree. The waterfall is clearly also the main subject and focal point in #2, but the foreground adds significant interest.
The final image #4 takes a different approach, by showing us not a vertical image with layers from nearby to further away, but a more classic postcard orientation (horizontal), with a broader view of the whole scene including a now more complete large boulder on the right hand side of the image (we had seen part of that boulder in previous images). The boulder being complete now, turns it into a secondary subject that competes for attention with the waterfall. It is a good representation of the whole scene and landscape and will probably be many viewers' favourite.
I however still prefer #2, because of the layering and the immersion, and probably also because I have an irrational and totally subjective soft spot for vertical images over horizontal images, in general.
And two interesting images they are:
* the second has that very peculiar bokeh that you achieve with some of your converted legacy lenses (in this case the bokeh is REALLY odd, because it seems to swirl around the subject)
* the first is peculiar because of the fact that the rounded metal shapes that we just see at the top of the frame, seem to cast unusual shadows below : the specific position of the light source abstracts these shapes into just a straight little line, stripping them of their curves.
Thirsty sheep gathering at the watering hole. It tells a story.
The white gravel road (like we find them in Tuscany and Umbria and Le Marche) creates a leading line to the secondary subject: the buildings on the horizon.
I have a feeling that we are in roughly the same neighbourhood from your last week's image.
Opulent houses guarding a private access to blissful beach.
It' a gorgeous sky and we get to peek at it through a curtain of dark tree shapes. I almost feel like I am there.
What I think is particularly appealing here, is that we also see just enough of the ground stretching out before us, and that is painted in the warm late light.
It is not just an image of sky. It is a whole scene.
