Need some opinions on this one (w/ reply and second version)

This is a shot from Shore Acres. The place is awesome, the light was really nice and I was having fun with all the textures, but I'm not sure if how I framed the formation in this particular image is interesting and artistic or just strange. The image can always go into my stock archives, but I'm not sure if it makes the cut beyond that. What say you...thumbs up or thumbs down?

Im in agreement with Jesse. I really like the foreground interest, as well as the complementary blues and tans but I would like to see a little more water in this one. Its still a great image with excellent perspective.

-bryan

I think this is great Sean. Love the powerful foreground texture and the razorback line leading my eye away. I also like the wave action along the coast. The high tree on the right side exiting the frame seems to lock my eye for some reason, so maybe a slight clone there. The sandstone and blues work well together.

David M. Cobb

Personally, I think the large formation in the foreground is a bit much. I love the lines into the photo. I agree that it's a good image overall, but I really feel like I want to see more of just the lines and some water/ocean, if that makes any sense.

I'd say keep it. The light is muy bueno, and the rocks and sky colors complement each other perfectly.

This area is a photographers dream, and nightmare all at the same time. The crazy rock formations, tide pools and huge waves are an endless opportunity for compositions, but its so damn hard to pull it all together with SO much going on everywhere.

I would like to see more of the ocean, but that would hurt the angle to see the slanted sandstone layers. Its really a toss-up as to what you want to photograph - the waves, or the rocks from the best angle. I think you have done well to combine both, without hurting the other too much.

I hope you turned around and got a shot of that gnarly old tree with its roots exposed, reflected in the pools below you. I bet the light was perfect for that...

I really really, love the lighting in this and wish it was a bit of a vertical pano that spans and shows more water for bigger detail. it's something that i'd probably hang on my wall if there was more ocean to showcase the location. Something that perhaps you could ND for longer exposure to smooth the waves to make it easier to stitch together. I'm a bit of a pano nut. :D

Two thumbs WAY up (while the rest of the fingers are typing) here!

You always have the best shots ! I think this could be a more dynamic image if there was more wave & tidewater action on the left.

Thanks, as always, for the honest, helpful and expert feedback. Interesting that I was mostly concerned with the weird rock in the foreground and most of you zeroed in on the fact that there isn't enough ocean showing to get the feel of "place". I do have a horizontal shot that brings in more of the ocean, but I'm not sure it is any better. The main reason I don't like this image is the extreme wide angle distortion to the trees and the ocean horizon. I have done as much perspective control in PS as I can, but there are still distortion issues. The light and polarization in this one is slightly different too.

I don't know what's up with everyone's ocean fetish. The vertical shot is about the stone, not the ocean. The horizontal version is OK, but the water is too boring to justify taking up so much real estate in the frame. Additionally, the light on the stones in the vertical shot is much more dramatic, especially when contrasted against the brooding sky. I would crop a bit from the bottom of the vertical shot and call it a keeper. Your processing is great, Sean!

I have to agree 100% with Mr. Dilley. This shows kind of what I was trying to say in my last reply. The ocean is so far away, and the majority of the most interesting rock is now confined to a skinny little slice over on the right. I'd stick with the vertical shot.

Now, if the waves were pounding up onto the cliffs, this comp might work better, but you probably wouldn't be standing there if it were!

I'm sticking with #1 Sean. The second image has an odd magenta cast to the sky and water, and there seems to be a slight tilt to the ocean too. I also agree, that there's just too much ocean out there in the horizontal, and just the right amount in the vertical.

David M. Cobb

I'm drawn into the second much more than the first. They're both very strong images, but the graphical quality of the second elevates it, imo.

I do like having a little more ocean - I don't think it's critical, but it does make that part of the image more relevant. Then, the way that all of the discrete areas and lines converge is more powerful in the second, and that's what keeps me engaged. The trees, the rock escarpment, the water-covered lower shelf, the rocky beach, the ocean and even the clouds all converge near a single point - I think that's pretty strong. That's probably why I like more ocean - not so much for the visual interest of the waves, but because it lends balance to the wedge-shaped areas that are responsible for the strong graphical qualities.

I also like the quality of the light better in #2 - it provides a little more diversity of color in the main rock areas. In #1, it's mostly all one color (nice color, but homogenous).

The distortion on the horizon is a little bothersome, but the trees less so. I'd expect them to be leaning from the wind; maybe not as much as they are, but it doesn't hang me up. A scoche more room above the trees would be ideal, but not critical.

Really nice work.

There are dynamics of each of these images that are superior to the other. The combination of the best from both would make the best image. Alas, something we have all experienced for sure. I like the panorama of #2 & the angle & tone of #1. Both are well done ! Ultimately, your 1st choice is the best on the day (IMHO). Cheers !

Sean, I like the first version better.....the lines really draw the viewer into the sky.....very well done!