Yeay, Nay...? (updated w/ original)

I've been playing around with the technique that Jesse described a while back. For some images, it works very well; for others, like this one, I'm undecided.

This is an image from a couple of autumns ago. I always liked the original, but felt it was too static to stand on its own. I created a duplicate layer of the original, applied motion blur to that layer, then tweaked the layers to bring back some of the detail from the original.

Does it hold any appeal for you or is it just too funky?

For me, this works, Rick. I love the effect and the earthy tones.

Howdy Rick! I agree with Paul's comments but it seems to have a strange "focus effect" to my eyes - mabe it is my glasses but it seems to go in and out of a soft focus as I move closer or away from my screen. Have you printed this? It might work but maybe the effect is bit too strong.
John

Rick, It also has a strange effect on my eyes and I don't wear glasses.(yet). The tones are great but it seems to cause a strain on the eyes.

I like it. For me, it works well.

Rick, I like this presentation a lot because of the strong warm colors with contrasting dark trunk, but generally agree with the others that it is difficult on the eyes. For what ever reason it seems to be out of focus left to right, even though it's the motion blur is vertical. I think part of the problem is the lighter bare branches in the front which are blurred into a foggy gray. Maybe less motion blur in the top, and maybe a different way of combining the layers (darken or lighten) would help.

John

I like the blur concept. Love the color palette. Great image for this effect.
For me the amount of motion blur in the trees is fine, but I would prefer less blur in the foreground grasses. I find the zone between the grasses and trees especially bothersome.
But, hey, that's just my eyeballs.

Oh ya...very nice! I like it.

Rod

I like it too. The rich colors are very nice and the blur effect maybe takes away a little of the static feel in the trees? The straight line between the tree trunks and foreground are maybe another reason you might think of it as static. While it is still there, it is still a very nice rendering.

I like the top 2/3rds, but because the foreground is so light, it tends to dominate the composition. Basically, I think the technique works well with the vertical trees, but not for the grasses. Try cropping it out and see what you think.

Ken

A big print on canvas would be stunning.

Sure gets a thumbs up from me!

Looks good! I like how the tree trunks don't seem quite as phased by the technique as the rest of it does. I think cropping just a bit of the grass would work for me too.

I love the colors but you might play with varying the effect against the grass versus the trees. The effect seems stronger on the grass (more blury) and my eye gets drawn to the grass more, maybe because that is the lighter region. Overall I like it but my eye wanders a bit with no clear focus.

Back for a second look - I think the issue for me is the bright area on the right lower edge. This keeps pulling my eye to that area creating a strong visual tension that pulls my eyes out of the frame. Darken that area and you have a winner. I think Ken is on to someting as well. I am going to have to try this on one of my "almost worked" images.
John

This works for me!

I don't think it works very well with the grass, but with the trees it is excellent. So I say,"yea".

Thanks for all of the comments and suggestions. Looks like it has potential, and some more experimenting is in order. (If anyone's interested, here's the original, unaltered image.)

Regarding the in-focus, out-of-focus... yep, I think that's the big struggle with this technique, or at least this rendering. At this size and viewing distance, the subtle details are right in that transition zone where they seem to come and go. I have printed it and, unless you're at arm's length, the details fade into the background and the trunks become the focal point. I'm not sure that the print works as well as it could yet, but it is a different viewing experience.

I agree about the grasses; I personally like having them, but I'm cropping so that they occupy maybe 15% of the frame.

I think the trunks are a strong anchor, but it sounds like the transition between grasses and trees is causing some trouble. The more I look at it, the more I agree. It's less troublesome in the print, but I'm going to try to back off the effect there.

John Z. - good eye; I agree. That's a byproduct of an opacity setting that should be easy to address.

Rick, I certainly like what you've done, but I really like the original even more! I find the style, mood, comp and color very appealing. And it's very painterly in original form. The foreground grass really makes this image sing.

Again, they both work well, I think. I'd be tempted to mask off most of the grass area (or at least the grass edge) when working with this technique.

Rick,
I love the first one. But I don't seem to be bothered as others are by focus issues etc. because I don't "see" it as a photograph but more as a painting. Even though I know it's originating from a photo and manipulated in PS, without knowing that I'd think it was a painting and therefore anything goes. Great work!! Pat

Rick.... great job!! I like the original version. But I think the frame shadow is distracting, but the shot itself is very beautiful. Great contrast and complimentary colors...regards, Rajeev.

Rick, I gotta say, I think the original is beautiful and already has a sweet soft quality to it. I wouldn't change it.

I like V2 better - in spite of the great golden color, the first gave me motion sickness.

Well, I'm not surprised by the range of opinions on the first - it's a tough image to connect with as is.

I am surprised by the appeal of the 2nd. This one has been in my "pending deletion" folder since I took it about 2 years ago. While I like the top 2/3, the grasses kill it for me - flat, uninteresting, no contrast, too bright, little texture, little detail, and the straight horizontal area blocks off the rest of the image instead of grounding it. I might feel a little reluctant to be that blunt in a critique, but since I'm critiquing myself, I'm sure I can handle it.

I'm sure I could bring it to life with some PS work, but I think I first need to revisit my "pending deletion" folder!

I like the 2nd one better, but I would crop out about 2/3rds of the bright grass in both photos.

I'm with Jesse, I love the original version. It has a great painternly feel and subtle emotion. I love the colors too which the blurred version retains. I agree about the grass, so a crop would be worth trying. I bet printing on canvas or a textured matte would really fit this well. I wouldn't throw it away!

This will look great printed on Canvas and stretched over a wood frame (gallery wrap).

Guy

I really like the first one a lot Rick, I've experimented with that technique a bit myself, and want to some more. But.....

If you do keep the original in the "pending deletion" folder, or by some chance actually delete, I will personally drive the 1200 miles to your house and kick your butt! Oh, and steal all your homemade jerky! Love that image!!

Rick, my only nit with the second shot is that it is bright, which does rob contrast from the grass. Otherwise it's a worthy image.

John

Well, you've convinced me to take a stab at #2. I never did much with it because of the grasses, but I have the RAW file and can start by getting the tonal quality under control.

I did print the first one after working on that grass/tree transition area; I also printed another one that is very similar. They turned out great - printed on Hahnemuhle Photorag at 13x19, wide white mat and dark frame. Viewed from any reasonable distance, they look really nice, especially as a pair. Get up close, and the blur becomes too distracting.

Thanks again for all of the opinions, feedback and suggestions! I'm working on a couple more and will post as I make progress.

Rick, the top image is stunning! It gets a big YEAY from me!! Personally I don’t think its difficult on the eyes, but rather soothing. ...maybe just clone out the perfectly straight line in the center of the image.

I'm a little late here... but, #2 is really great. The blurred version... I don't like so much to be honest. I think the original has a nice abstract feel to it already.