[LadyVengeance]

This was taken the same day (and same place, just down below the cliff) as the sheep photo i posted here recently.



The sky actually doesn't belong in the same photo, I joined it from another I took that day because the sky was mostly cut off in the original with the rocks and water. Does it look really obvious? I'm not sure whether it's convincing enough, if not, any ideas what I can do to improve it?

Thanks for looking

-LV

EDIT: Below is a slightly different version of the same photo, except I didn't darken the part where the sky meets the water, I can't decide which version looks better. >
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/954/rocks2rd1.png

[fionaB]

personally i think the second sky looks more natural.
have to say tho that i dont think this image suits b/w contrast and it begins to look all a bit flat, although perhaps playing with curves may bring some of it out......... perhaps just bring back a little muted colour to give it some life........ any chance of seeing a colour version?
one last thing is that next time u try something like this get right down low so that instead of looking down on the rocks you are looking across them......... gives a much better perspective on the image.
atill a nice picture tho so give yourtself a pat on the back!

Fiona

[LadyVengeance]

Thanks fiona, I see what you mean about the B/W version. I tried the color version but the sky and water didn't seem to match so that's why I went for the black and white, i'll include a couple of the colour versions I tried out, in this thread to see if there's anything that can be done about them

These are two different attempts, the first one has more of a blue tone to the sky and the second i used more of a green tone.



-LV

[Rob Barron]

Aside from the sky issue, I must be honest and say the main feeling I get is that there is no real subject that grabs my eye in this shot. It is almost as though something is missing. The rocks are not varied enough to capture the attention and then it is 'just' sea and sky. I don't mean that in the slightest bit rude, just that it doesn't have enough to hold the attention.

I have had a play with it to try and boost the contrast and so forth and I think it has brought the FG up to give it a bit more oomph (technical term ) and adjusted the sea so that the foam of the waves is whiter and thus a bit fresher sort of thing.

See what you think anyway.
Cheers,
Rob

[Dabhand16]

Nice work, Rob. I agree with the comments about no real subject. For me, it works better with a crop just below the skyline and above the incoming wave.

[LadyVengeance]

Thanks for your comments Rob and Dabhand!

Rob, Thanks for the edit! and no worries! I'm glad for the comments, otherwise I'd be doing the same thing with future photos.

Actually, probably a weird question but, if I could have captured a subject that day, in that photo, what would you (and anyone who wants to answer) imagine or think would have suited the photo and what placement etc...? What I mean is, if there was another
object in the photo or an extra subject to catch the eye.

Hopefully that made sense, haha.

-LV

[Rob Barron]

That is an open question to be honest LV, it could be something as large as a fishing boat with guys throwing their nets over the side or it could be as small as a bright red starfish sitting on one of the rocks. Else it could be a small boy on the rocks with fishing net and bucket in hand doing some rock-pooling or a buoy floating in the sea just off sure. No one thing is the answer but something where the eye stops and settles for a moment when looking at the picture. In this picture, the eye travels around the picture and gets a pleasant view but doesn't find anywhere to specifically stop and focus.

I hope that answer makes sense.

Cheers,
Rob

[Dabhand16]

Not an exhaustive list, but some ideas would be -

Lower viewpoint and someone sitting on the rocks.

Interesting rock/rock formation/feature to occupy foreground.

Kids looking into rockpools.

Boat/waterskier/windsurfer not too far out.