Posted by Mike Dawson on August 8, 2007 at 2:53 AM
Opinions needed here! Better in color or B/w or not at all. Definitely a departure from my normal style. After driving up to Rainier after work last night I figured I should take a few images in spite of the dense fog?
Comments and critiques please?
Canon 5D
17-40L
ISO200
f22
2 sec
Posted by Mike Dawson on August 8, 2007 at 2:54 AM
Color, cropped above the rock thing. I love how the eye has to strain to look through the fog. Simplicity works better than to bring the near far thing into it.
Posted by Mark Windom on August 8, 2007 at 11:13 AM
B&W with a little more contrast. (Will be interesting to see how many different opinions you get on this one.)
Hi Mike,
The rock in the foreground is not significant enough to feature it. The mist shrouded trees are too vague to balance the rock. I agree with Rick, crop above the rock and try adding a little saturation to bring out just a hint more color in the water.
Posted by Adrian Klein on August 8, 2007 at 2:44 PM
I personally like the rock in the FG. Although the image is still nice w/o it, I personally think it adds some interest to the FG and leads your eye into the water then into the foggy trees rather well. And color is the nicer of the two.
Posted by Ned Fenimore on August 8, 2007 at 2:53 PM
I like it in color, Mike - and overall I love the image.. I like the fact that I need to study it for a few seconds as the background detail comes into focus - just like seeing the scene first hand. I don't believe a B&W version does this the justice it deserves..
Discussion
7 repliesComments and critiques please?
Canon 5D
17-40L
ISO200
f22
2 sec
The rock in the foreground is not significant enough to feature it. The mist shrouded trees are too vague to balance the rock. I agree with Rick, crop above the rock and try adding a little saturation to bring out just a hint more color in the water.