first photo post

This is my first photo post and needless to say, I'm a little nervous. I'm trying to learn to "see the light." This was mid to late afternoon at Deer Creek Canyon. Any guidance is appreciated. Since I'm not a full member yet, you can view here:

http://jackgarrett.smugmug.com/gallery/4124825#240635077

Hi John,

Please consider joining - this is a great group of (primarily landscape) photographers! You' receive a wide variety of opinions and assistance on many topics.

OK, you asked, so I'll give an honest opinion.

In my view, this is a (documentary) picture of a mountain, bushes and grass. It doesn't really speak to me or create an emotion. I think we've all been there and I applaud your willingness to gain feedback. This is the way most of learned originally. My first portfolio review was pretty tough to hear and I walked away thinking maybe I'd misjudged my chosen avocation! I'm far from claiming to be a great landscape photographer - there are many others in this group that are way better, so check out their Webs to get an idea of where you need to target yourself. In any case, here are some basic things to consider.

1. First, landscapes are rarely successful when taken mid-day. The best lighting is during the golden hours - early morning and late afternoon or evening.

2. I'm not sure what the subject is in your photo. There's nothing really to catch my eye. You need what I call compositional elements that catch the eye and cause the viewer to scan from element to element around the composition. Boulders, flowers, interesting-looking trees, streams, waterfalls, etc., would add some interest.

3. Think about including some basic compositional elements, such as leading lines, rule of thirds, geometric positioning, foreground/midground/background elements for a sense of depth. Above all identify the subject. What caught your eye in the scene? Then zero in on that subject - including only those elements that add interest or strengthen the composition. In my seminars, I often explain the difference between a painter and a photographer. A painter starts with a blank canvas and adds the subject and a few compositional elements until they have the final picture. A photographer starts with "the world" in front of themselves and once the main subject is identified, eliminate any elements that detract or clutter the composition until they have the final picture.

3. With uninteresting blue skies, you either want to wait for clouds or include a compositional element, such as colorful rocks, etc., as a counterpoint.

There are many other compositional techniques that I'll skip at this point.

Many of us develop "self-assignments" where we go out to a specific place at the right lighting - taking many different views / viewpoints of the area. Now, here's your assignment... Go out to that area again, find some interesting compositional features you could use as elements in the composition, retake the pictures at sunrise or sunset (depending on the direction you're shooting) and repost the results.

I want to make it clear I'm not trying to discourage you, but to encourage you.

There are any number of good books on composition, lighting and landscape photography. There are also so very good workshops and seminars. I try to take at least one major workshop per year as well as continue to read up on new techniques. I once took a week-long workshop in the Tetons where our images were critiqued by the likes of the editor-in-chief of the National Geographic, the editor of American Photo, the photo editor of the New York Times, and several other big-name nature photographers. The first day's critique was pretty ugly. But, you know what? By the end of that week we participants could see ourselves the vast improvement we had made!

So crack those books, get out in the field and shoot - shoot - shoot! You'll be surprised how quickly you'll catch on.

Best regards, Ken

Hi John,

I see you posted a third picture of a bristlecone pine - way better!! There's a LOT I like about this one! Better sky - subtle pastel colors. You've zeroed in on the subject. There are various compositional elements that move my eyes around the frame. Now THAT'S what I'm talking about!!

Ken

Thanks Ken for your input. I've been shooting for about 3 years now and I really want to elevate my level in photography. I see photos by some very good photographers here and hope to reach that plateau. The hardest part for me is "seeing the light." I look at photos by Tony and Marc Adamus and I am in awe of how they have captured the light and emotion. I need to take a couple more workshops for sure as time and money permit. Thanks for your candid remarks...that's how we get better.

Jack

John,

The bristlecone photo is killer! Fantastic composition and perfect light for the subject. I wouldn't change a thing about that one.

The mountain image isn't bad and I actually like the light grazing the hillside. A more interesting composition certainly would have helped elicit a more emotional reaction.

The waterfall image is pretty darn good, too. Superb colors and a nice flow throughout the image. If I could change anything I would eliminate the bit of sky peeking through the trees in the URH corner and, if possible, find a composition that would place the fall foliage more to the left to cover that uninteresting piece of mountain.

I will say that you seem to have a good handle on processing images as all three of these are very well done.

Hope you do join the forum as it's a great group of people and a wonderful resource.

Folks have gotten to where I was going to go on this post before I did. The mountain shot didn't do much for me, though technically it's a good shot. The Bristlecone shot is excellent - great lighting, good composition, strong subject.

The waterfall/Aspen shot is also quite good; not knowing what was off-frame, it's hard to suggest a better composition; perhaps a slightly tighter shot, or maybe moving downstream a bit and shooting more directly upstream might have improved it - perhaps not. If you don't mind cropping, just a bit off of each edge - at the boulder crack on the left, and at the Aspen trunk on the right - leaves you with a vertical panoramic that might be more appealing. (Just eyeballing it; cropping the right might chop off the water flow in an inconvenient spot, though...)

We're all here to learn. Hope you join us!

You've had some great advice already in this thread, not really much else to add!.
The mountain composition isn't a bad shot, the light is fairly good, and it does have some nice lines in the background - the foreground subject doesn't do it for me though. The Bristlecone image is a winner for sure though, lots of interesting shapes, textures and light!. The waterfall looks good to, nicely lit, nice fall colours!. As Les said, it's hard to judge the composition of the waterfall shot without knowing what else was out of frame!.

I'm new to the RMNP forum, though not to NPN, but I can tell you it is well worth joining - you WILL learn alot no matter your skill level!.

Not sure if I've anything of value to add, other than keep at it . You got some good comments above but I'll add one and echo others:

1) I like the light in the bristlecone image but I'm wondering what you might have gotten had you went with a lower, slightly upward facing shot to put more of the tree against that nicely lit sky. I'd like to see if a little more separation between the tree and the darker background mountains.

2) Really digging the aspen-water image. Good interplay of green and yellow and the water blur is great. I'd also like to see the sky outta there if possible and I'm wondering if you might have been able to come to your left a little to get rid of the rocky hill.

Not knowing what was outside the frame it is purely speculation on my part. Are you going to make it to the Shindig on the 19th?? Love to see more.

Cheers,
Alex

Thanks for the comments everyone, I really appreciate them...that's how we learn to be better photographrts. I agree with the framing on the cascade image. The only problem I had there was about 100 people immediately to the right, enjoying the scene as well. I had to wait several minutes for one person to cross over the cascade to even get this shot. I have this location bookmarked and hope to get back there this fall. This forum is a great place for learning and I thank you once again. I'd love to make the shindig and get to know the people from here.

Alex, If that Bristlecone shot of John's is of the tree I think it's of, I'm amazed he got that low to the ground on it; it's in an awkward spot with "do not approach on pain of death" signs all around - well, at least the signs were there until they tore up the parking lot and put the whole area off-limits...

Nice shots John, the fall scene looks like the falls on Chalk Creek?

Tom, the cascade is known as the Alluvial Fan..remnants of a dam break at RMNP in 1982. It is the West Horseshoe Park area. It's a pretty popular area and with luck you can get some interesting images in that area.

Ah! Knowing where that waterfall picture was taken, your best course of action would probably have been to move around a bit and tighten the shot slightly. I don't think there's really a "better" angle that would have naturally hidden the cut and the sky.

I am going with Ken on all his responses! I love the Bristlecone photograph best! We would love to have you join our humble little group!