just another tree...

[sash]

hi,

there's just something about bare trees...

http://www.pbase.com/alptraum/image/40865208/original.jpg

what do you think?

had to clone out quite a few spots from the sensor, hehe... copperhill kit should arrive next week and i'm not looking forward to the first cleaning :hide

sash

[BridgeCity]

Wow! I love the color contrast in this shot, nice work bringing out the blue's in the sky :thumb I think some of the plants in teh foreground are a bit distracting, you want the viewer to be drawn to the tree and not the plants at the bottom.. I would suggest cropping the bottom inch off right to the base of the log on the left hand side. I could be way off base here, just my .02

Awesome shot though, makes me jelous :cry

[Ann McRae]

Hi sash

Great shot! Love the color of the sky.

My 20d sensor needs cleaning too - copperhil kit has been here for a month or more. I had been waiting for the end of the soccer season, well its here, so....
:dunno

ann

[marlof]

I really enjoyed this picture. To me, the plants in the foreground added something with the brownish/white colors they contribute to the color mix. Good luck with the sensor cleaning!

[bfjr]

Deep rich colors, very cool :thumb
I also like the way it is , IMO think the foreground adds to over all depth and color of the image

Good job :thumb :thumb

[sash]

thanks all for your comments!
at one point i did tinker around with cropping some off the bottom but i kinda like those snow-capped weeds, lol. on the other hand, cropping would create a smooth balance of golden brown without distracting from the tree.

hmm, did another quick crop and am undecided lol

http://www.pbase.com/alptraum/image/40866949/original.jpg

cheers :wave
sascha

[gus]

Sash...great shot. Is that 17-40L ?

[sash]

Sash...great shot. Is that 17-40L ?
thanks! and yeah, other than the 50mm 1.8 the 17-40 is the only other lens in my arsenal, lol. shot at 17mm :thumb
sash

[Steve Cavigliano]

Sascha,

It's really nice, no matter which way you crop it :thumb :thumb As mentioned, great color and contrast :clap

Personally, I like the first one. I think the foreground plants add some depth. IMO, all that's missing in this shot is a big purple mountain in the BG, and that's not your fault......lol


Thanks for sharing,
Steve

[John Mueller]

Really nice .Did you use and CP on the 17-40?

[Harryb]

thanks all for your comments!
at one point i did tinker around with cropping some off the bottom but i kinda like those snow-capped weeds, lol. on the other hand, cropping would create a smooth balance of golden brown without distracting from the tree.

hmm, did another quick crop and am undecided lol

cheers :wave
sascha
Hey Sash,

Excellent shot.:super I would go with the first version.

[wxwax]

Gorgeous colors and beautiful scene, Sash, a lovely shot. I prefer the first image, like bfjr I reckon the plants add a nice dimension to the shot. Frankly, they might be too dark - I wonder what it would look like if they were a bit brighter?

Regardless, that's a super piccie, nice job! :thumb

[Shakey]

Excellent landscape. I too enjoy a bare tree with dramatic branching .
Foreground is a little dark but that is nit picking and many of mine are the same way too:D .
A shot I wish I took .

Cheers
Tim

[gpgold]

This shot for me is just plain lovely. The sky, the forground, all of it.

regards,

Gary

[Dixie]

hi,

there's just something about bare trees...

http://www.pbase.com/alptraum/image/40865208/original.jpg

what do you think?

had to clone out quite a few spots from the sensor, hehe... copperhill kit should arrive next week and i'm not looking forward to the first cleaning :hide

sash
I really like the composition. I think both shots with & without the foreground brush look great. From a personal preference, I tend to lean toward the original without the crop because it enhances the depth of the scene in the shot.

Not sure whether you used a "little" foreground to transparency darkening on the brush in the foreground, but that is a technique that I sometimes use to lead the eye into the main subject (in this case the tree). Since the foreground brush is darker, I like the composition. If the foreground brush were much lighter than I feel that it would distract and compete with the tree. Whether polarized or not the sky goes from darker to lighter (top to bottom) and works with the gradual darking of the foreground brush (bottom to top) to bring the eye to the area where the tree is located.

Bottomline, the "depth" of the scene in the original shot makes it my favorite of the two. For me it just works.

[Angelo]

#1 - Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeet!

[sash]

I really like the composition. I think both shots with & without the foreground brush look great. From a personal preference, I tend to lean toward the original without the crop because it enhances the depth of the scene in the shot.

Not sure whether you used a "little" foreground to transparency darkening on the brush in the foreground, but that is a technique that I sometimes use to lead the eye into the main subject (in this case the tree). Since the foreground brush is darker, I like the composition. If the foreground brush were much lighter than I feel that it would distract and compete with the tree. Whether polarized or not the sky goes from darker to lighter (top to bottom) and works with the gradual darking of the foreground brush (bottom to top) to bring the eye to the area where the tree is located.

Bottomline, the "depth" of the scene in the original shot makes it my favorite of the two. For me it just works.
dixie, thanks so much for your comments and thoughtful input :): i think i'll try lightening up the foreground a tad just to see how it looks... can't hurt to try :scratch i didn't really mess with the foreground much in post - for the most part, that area was in the shade provided by another tree.

cheers,
sascha

[sash]

thanks everyone for your comments! i'll play around with the brightness of the foreground as some have suggested and see how it looks :thumb

sash