[fionaB]

have been told by a couple of people that this picture should be either the tree or the church.,........ i know i kinda like them together....... so are they right ?



Fi

[Dabhand16]

For me it's either or. In the centre there is a competition between the church and the trees resulting in me not being able to make out either. The obelisk in the mid ground also takes my eye.

It is a picture with two subjects, something I was always taught to avoid.

[Rob Barron]

I actually feel ok with this Fiona. It is two subjects but two related subjects in that they come together in making a churchyard scene. If it was really moody and atmospheric it would work even more. Maybe a vignette around the bottom corners and edge to darken it down a bit woulc help to balance the top and bring it together. But as I say, I am ok with this shot even though the church is behind the tree. It's not traditionally supposed to work but I don't feel this is far off.

Cheers,
Rob

[Angela]

I wouldn't say it doesn't work...but it doesn't entirely work either. I think, as Rob says, that you could get away with the two subjects but I wonder if it had been better if you had been a few steps to either side so they weren't directly in line with each other?

[skipper954]

Hi Fi

It doesn't work for me. My brain is getting confused about what to focus upon. It might work if the tree wasn't smack dab in the middle of the church and both were not near the middle of the frame, but I don't know.

skip

[Markulous]

'Fraid I agree with Skip - it's neither tree nor church. Wonder how it'd look with the whole tree (and comp'd for tree, so less FG) as I think it work well then - including the central positioning

[lolyton]

I'm sorry Fiona, I'm with the majority on this one. For me this is the part of the image that is great.....


If you could have got (i know this isn't possible) the whole tree without the church and still kept that dramatic lighting (worth bearing in mind next time you see a similar tree on it's own though) you would have had an image that would have been liked by us all (i reckon). But it's just the church lets it down. It's part hidden by the tree and it's just not quite sure whether it wants to be there or not!

Not sure how the masses will receive this one, but i think it is slightly more acceptable and a little less confusing than the original (all a matter of opinion tho!).


If it were just the tree though it would be grand (lighting is great, sort of thing i like).

[fionaB]

okies... next time im there its a return trip to see if i can get the tree on its own. the problem is that its the town centre at the back of the tree if i move to the left........ BUT the river if i move to the right so it may just be possible.............. hmmmmmmmm requires some thought for this. thanx muchly people! as always its appreciated

Fi

[lolyton]

The problem with trying to catch the tree on it's own is the light will not be the same, and i feel the lighting of this image is one of it's features!

[Dixie]

Hi Fiona, not been around for a while but I saw this so had to have a look. I can't tell you if it is right technically, I don't know enough but I like the picture as it is quite powerful. I don't think the tree and the church are a problem and it sort of has an ironic link in a way. The church is about Christianity and the Bible says Jesus was crucified on 'a tree' in some versions. But whatever, I like it anyway!

[Rob Barron]

Wow Dixie, nice link! How come I didn't think of that? But you're right so that must be why I liked it

[fionaB]

lol well as i have never read the bible iwould never have got the link, but like yourself Dixie I DO like it as it is and i cant tell anyone why! lol
thank you for all the comments folks much appreciated and as always taken on board

Fi

[Boofers]

Don't know if you still worry about the tree, but the little trees on ether side make it busy. I like trees, in this shot though, you only need one tree for a black cat.