[fionaB]

From the other week at limekilns...........

[Markulous]

Think I'd have preferred the digger further into the frame - like the low perspective

[skipper954]

Hi Fi

This is a very cool pic. Good textures, vanishing point, focus. I agree with Mark...it should have been framed in camera to put the digger at a third. Here he is much too close to the edge and becomes sort of an afterthought to the image.

skip

[fionaB]

ok im gonna be honest here........... when i took the shot it was not my intention to have anyone into the shot as i was trying to get a perspective of the pipe running into the water... but when i realised i had caught ( Murray, my son) in the image, i thought it kinda added another dimension to the shot.

Thanx for the comments as always much appreciated.

Fi

[chickadee]

I think i would of gone with your first idea , no one in shot just had the pipes going into water, did you manage to get any other shots just with the pipes?Personally i would crop from left to white forefround rock , and then see what it looks as mono. LIke the cloud formation and i always like the low level shots.especially for effect and contour of the ground (if you know what i mean) Great overall formations and different textures

[nichpr]

Sometimes when you break the rules, you end up with an interesting shot. That's what I thought when I first looked at this one. Then, the more I looked, the more it bothered me that he was so close to the edge and looking off. I like a person in this shot because it gives it scale - can you turn him around in PS?

- Paul

[fionaB]

thanx Paul,......... should think so, i didint actually think of doing that.

Chick.............. i did have a quick look but it didint really grab me in mono

thanx

Fi

[Geoff Semmens]

I agree with Paul, flip the son over in photoshop so he also lends to the vanishing point. Teach Murray to get in the way!

I like the angle and the lines. I even prefer it with the figure even if it has caused this debate as to which way he should look. He may be in the correct way after all.

Excellent.

Geoff TWO

[fionaB]

many thanx Geoff.......... i am having a self debate about it as well......... although i DO see what everyone says....... it kind of grows on me the way it is....

Fi

[fionaB]

ok have turned him round and brought him in slightly..............

[skipper954]

just that little change made the image so much better. He is not not drawing attention to the edge, and leads the psychological eye (I know, what the heck is that?) back into the picture.

[fionaB]

thanx for that Skip......... although i dont think the lighting is right in this as his face is lit and it should be his back...... was onnly a 5 minute fix tho .

Fi

[Rob Barron]

I did this before I realised you had done your own bit I am going to stick it here anyway just for one little reason: the feet area on yours looks a bit 'cut-out' but other than that it definitely makes the image work much better. I don't agree that the lighting looks wrong. His face is lit but the brightest part of the sky is in front of him in the picture so it doesn't look odd other than to you because you know what you've done. I bet you could show that to a hundred people and none would mention the lighting as being wrong.

I really like this image with the change made, the angle of the pipe running in from right to left works so well that you tend not to notice the horizon line being half way up the picture. It works in this one because of the detail in the sky and the detail in the FG balancing it.

Good stuff Fi

Cheers,
Rob