I want to publicly thank Christopher Jordan for putting me onto this place. Big Walnut Preserve is a Nature Conservancy property located in central Indiana, about 30 miles due west of the western outskirts of Indianapolis. Since my Indy residence is in the extreme northeast part of the area, it's about a 90-minute drive for me.
I scouted the location on the afternoon of Sunday, April 26. The conditions were entirely unsuited for photography that day (sunny and windy), but I could see that the location had plenty of potential.
I was there, with photo gear, on April 29, the day after some heavy rains; it was an overcast, relatively low-wind, day and I spent 5-6 hours wandering around and shooting.
This shot represents three stitched vertical frames: D700, 80-400 @ 110mm, f/11, 1/80 sec., ISO 200
Compression is doing this shot no favors (I had to process this JPEG at barely 50% to get it under the size limit) and, as usual, the conversion to sRGB is washing out the spring greens quite a bit.
Kerry - nice job! Is this looking across the creek to the far bank? I have a pano from that general location that reminds me of this.....I love how this evokes the spring season.
I was trying to get one of my Brown County shots posted last night, and then I was going to point out that I was waiting on you to post a Big Walnut shot. Guess the joke's on me now.....I'll have to get busy!
Looking forward to more, if you spent 6 hours there!
CJ
CJ--bingo on the location. This is looking across the creek (which was really flowing that day, BTW) from the sandy area at the end of the creek trail spur. There were a couple of areas of redbud (and the very occasional dogwood) on the far side of the creek, amidst the fresh spring greenery, that were workable.
It's remarkable how much detail is lost in this conversion, not to mention how crappy the green palette in sRGB is compared to that of Adobe RGB; that never ceases to amaze me.
Kerry, the colors of this relay the idea of SPRING to the viewer, but for me I'm longing to see stronger lines in the trunks and branches or something in the scene to bring it together. I'd like to see it bigger to get a better taste of it!
Kerry, I'm having trouble figuring out what this image is trying to accomplish. I love the idea of capturing the beauty of budding, flowering spring foliage, which you have presented here well, but the overall image doesn't bring it all together in a compelling way for me (at this size). The largest tree trunk is dead center and leads me to looking at the white blossoms, upper center left, and I have nowhere to go from there. For me, the image works best with the greens and purples and the surrounding tree trunks in the lower portion of the frame.
My goal with this image was a fairly simple one; I wanted it to say "spring"...or perhaps more accurately "SPRING!"...in unfettered terms. Whether I succeeded is, certainly, a matter of opinion and I do appreciate your weighing in.
The details unquestionably are being trashed here. I had to reduce the quality to 50 (I don't know that I've ever had to go that low to stay within the 200K limit) and I did think twice about posting this at all, but I'd promised CJ.
Compositionally, I did want to include the dogwood (the white blossoms) along with the redbud (the purplish/pinkish blossoms) and spring greens as part of this mosaic, as I think of it. I do have some shots without any dogwood--just redbud and greens--and perhaps I'll post that down the road as a kind of contrast. In terms of the arrangement of the trees, what you see here was quite deliberate. My intent was to create a hint of symmetrical order around what is otherwise a rather chaotic explosion of color patches and details (the latter being restricted, admittedly, to a larger presentation); hence the centering of the light-colored trunk buttressed on both sides by dark trunks and branches.
In any case, you make some thought-provoking points. I've looked at this as a 12x18 inch print, with the proper color space, and it has so much more impact (to my eye in any event) than it does as presented here that it's difficult, if not impossible, to overstate the case. Some images simply don't translate well to the web and, much to my chagrin, this isn't the first time I've fallen afoul of that maxim.
Kerry, I'd really like to see this one at a much larger size, or printed. I'm sure it would make a huge difference in the visual impact/compelling departments. I also appreciate your explanation of what you had in mind when making the image in the field. I think this forum is at its best when the thread develops in a way that merges the posted image with the photographer's intention/goals mixed in with the comments of other forum members.
One of the main reasons I look forward to your posts and comments is because you do such a good job of explaining your work and what you are seeing/experiencing in the work of others. That, and I'm a fan and admirer of your work. Many thanks on both counts (sharing your work and thoughts).
Discussion
9 repliesI scouted the location on the afternoon of Sunday, April 26. The conditions were entirely unsuited for photography that day (sunny and windy), but I could see that the location had plenty of potential.
I was there, with photo gear, on April 29, the day after some heavy rains; it was an overcast, relatively low-wind, day and I spent 5-6 hours wandering around and shooting.
This shot represents three stitched vertical frames: D700, 80-400 @ 110mm, f/11, 1/80 sec., ISO 200
Compression is doing this shot no favors (I had to process this JPEG at barely 50% to get it under the size limit) and, as usual, the conversion to sRGB is washing out the spring greens quite a bit.
I was trying to get one of my Brown County shots posted last night, and then I was going to point out that I was waiting on you to post a Big Walnut shot. Guess the joke's on me now.....I'll have to get busy!
Looking forward to more, if you spent 6 hours there!
CJ
It's remarkable how much detail is lost in this conversion, not to mention how crappy the green palette in sRGB is compared to that of Adobe RGB; that never ceases to amaze me.
Looking forward to some Brown Co. material.
My goal with this image was a fairly simple one; I wanted it to say "spring"...or perhaps more accurately "SPRING!"...in unfettered terms. Whether I succeeded is, certainly, a matter of opinion and I do appreciate your weighing in.
The details unquestionably are being trashed here. I had to reduce the quality to 50 (I don't know that I've ever had to go that low to stay within the 200K limit) and I did think twice about posting this at all, but I'd promised CJ.
Compositionally, I did want to include the dogwood (the white blossoms) along with the redbud (the purplish/pinkish blossoms) and spring greens as part of this mosaic, as I think of it. I do have some shots without any dogwood--just redbud and greens--and perhaps I'll post that down the road as a kind of contrast. In terms of the arrangement of the trees, what you see here was quite deliberate. My intent was to create a hint of symmetrical order around what is otherwise a rather chaotic explosion of color patches and details (the latter being restricted, admittedly, to a larger presentation); hence the centering of the light-colored trunk buttressed on both sides by dark trunks and branches.
In any case, you make some thought-provoking points. I've looked at this as a 12x18 inch print, with the proper color space, and it has so much more impact (to my eye in any event) than it does as presented here that it's difficult, if not impossible, to overstate the case. Some images simply don't translate well to the web and, much to my chagrin, this isn't the first time I've fallen afoul of that maxim.
One of the main reasons I look forward to your posts and comments is because you do such a good job of explaining your work and what you are seeing/experiencing in the work of others. That, and I'm a fan and admirer of your work. Many thanks on both counts (sharing your work and thoughts).