Witch Hazel

Here's one that I'm not real sure about - I like the lines of the branches, but don't know what else is here to appeal to the viewer. Comments appreciated as always.

D2x; 24-70mm; f/8, 1/6 sec

Or is this one better...?

They are both decent images. I am not sure if either is a "Wow" but as part of a collction of images on a certain area they have value.

As a stand alone I like the bottom a bit more. On the top I might crop a bit off the bottom to fill the frame with tree.

The last one looks better to me.

My opinion is worth just what you paid for it.

Bill, that is one full Ozark Witch Hazel. I have not seen one so many-branched and extremely full-flowered before. Did you fertilize it last year! There must be an open canopy above it, huh?

I like the first photo for the fullness of the shrub. That is an incredible display of flowers highlighted by the dark background, but I think a more interesting photo is the second one. I like the layers and the blueness of the water is remarkable. I typically think of Boston Mountain streams as being a bit murky due to the clay particles, not like those crystal clear spring fed streams in the MO part of the Ozarks.

Well done!

Best,
Don

The first shot is an interesting nature study of Witch Hazel in flower, but doesn't quite draw me into the photo with any emotional impact. The second is more interesting visually, but seems to have a divided focus between Witch Hazel and the stream. I really like the colors in the stream.

Hey Bill, I vote for the second one, but you know I am a bit partial to water. By the way, I saw a bunch of witch Hazel today will paddling Frog Bayou. Don is correct, it is everywhere this year!

I suspect most viewers will like the bottom one. That said, I think the top one has special appeal but the hints of background are a distraction. If you selectively darkened the rocks I believe it would be more compellling. As presented, the eye keeps trying to see beyond the witch hazel rather than dwelling on it.

Well I love shots of flowing water so my first impression was to say I liked the bottom one better, but as I scrolled back and forth between the two shots, I found myself looking longer and longer at the first photo. I'm not really sure what, except that there was a lot of things to look at if that makes sense, following all the tree branches though the photo etc...it has an almost hypnotic effect for me. I guess if I was going to hang a big print of these on my wall, I would want the bottom one where people would most likely just be passing by and have time to say, wow that is a great shot. I would want the the first one in a place where people might sit and spend some time looking at it. They are both beautiful.

Bill, I won't comment on the technicals since they are impeccable as usual. The second one is more appealling to me becasue it places the Witch Hazel in its environment. As mentioned, the sporadic rock in the bg of the first one draws the eye and diminshes the impact of the beautiful WH.

Hey Bill,

There are two species of witch hazel in AR, so you maybe asking yourself which witch hazel do I have? Well, your Ozark witch hazel, Hamamelis vernalis, occurs throughout the Ozarks and Ouachitas in rocky streams. It has orange- to rust-colored flowers and blooms in Jan-Feb making it the first woody plant to flower in the new year. (Second would be silver maple.) The other witch hazel, eastern witch hazel, Hamamelis virginiana, also has about the same distribution in AR but is found on lower slopes that are mostly east- or north-facing. It doesn't like to get its roots streamside wet. It has yellow flowers and blooms in November making it the last woody species to flower for the year.

I apologize for going on but I wanted to point out that the common name "witch hazel" by itself just doesn't cut it.

Best,
Don

Thanks to all for taking a minute or two to comment. Sometimes it's difficult to isolate what really appeals to me, like the witch hazel in this case. This was taken just below Falling Water falls along the far side, so it was somewhat open, but lots of other trees nearby.

Very interesting lesson about the bloom times, Don...quite a distinction to be the woody genus that is first and last to bloom each year!

Don: I seem to recall that one of these has much more fragrance than the other - I think the one in November has less while the "winter" variety has much more - at least that is what I've noticed in recent years. Sometimes the Ozark species will stop you in your tracks while out hiking on a crisp but sunny January day before you ever see it while the Eastern species will often go unnoticed in the fall unless you see it. I've seen a ton of the Ozark species in bloom of late - probably most than in most years - but I don't catch much fragrance at all from the flowers this year. Just in my nose, or is there a reason for this?

Tim, you're right about the odors of the two witch hazels. I'm thinking that fall bloomers can be less fragrant because they don't have to rely as much on attracting pollinators. Residual insect populations have not had to go dormant or die yet from the upcoming winter temps while the Jan-Feb blooming witch hazel needs to stir awake those numb nectar seekers.

As for your nose not smelling them as much this year, well, maybe your nose needs a checkup!

Best,
Don

I didn't notice as much fragrance either, Tim. I squeezed one of the blooms between my fingers and couldn't smell much at all. But I could catch a whiff every now and then from all of them along the creek...

Given your latitude, the peak of flowering may have been pretty much over. As flowers start to decline, so does their smell.