Sea Arch and Nowhere Bridge

Ok,

After Anthony's nice post from big Sur and Ben's 'bridge to nowhere' I thought I would ask for your opinion on this one I took earlier this year.

Reno asked a question about the bridge which I have wanted to clone out of this and other images. So I did here. Now to be fair I will post a link to the original and this one in the larger sizes.

http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/7049912_hqPLs#581244529_9nZ56-A-LB

http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/7049912_hqPLs#473210906_e8rud-A-LB

Although I normally don't remove structures and prefer to crop I thought I would see how this looks. So which do you prefer?

Derek

It has a mystical feeling about it. Well done, Derek.

I prefer the shot w/o the bridge because the view of the bridge in the original doesn't add anything to the shot. The image w/o the bridge isn't doing anything for me, looks like another snap shot pic of the south coast. The Bixby Creek Bridge IS part of the Big Sur coast, always has been for the 50+ years I've traveled up and down the coast from Monterey to Big Sur. There are many fine photos that include the bridge and many, many more without the bridge. I suppose it's all in the eye of the beholder

I think I prefer the juxtaposition of the natural with the manmade. Nice post capture work though.

This is one of my favorite viewpoints around Big Sur. I really wish there was public access down near the cliffs to get a better view of the arch.

Yeah, its easier to get a shot with the whole scene including the Bridge. Whats harder to do is really hone in on the sea arch and seastacks w/o the bridge in it. That was what I was after here. Although I would really like to get down there for a closer view myself.

I am sure 'some' photographers get down there as I have seen a picture of this arch from another better, closer up angle. But whether they got permission form the land owner or hopped the fence I am not sure. Either way it is still nice from road though.

That is one the nice things about Garrapta and then further south below Lucia where it is National Forest. You can actually walk out to the beach without worrying about getting fined because you are on ranch land.

Derek

Derek, I prefer it with the bridge but didn't notice it was gone until I read the post. As a natural scene it would be better without the bridge but it actually helps the comp there as is. In the general scheme of things the arch is the main attraction and is kind of small for the comp. I'd like to see it larger in the frame and that isn't possible maybe shot as a vertical comp with the 2 subjects on opposing sides of the comp. The water action on the arch is really nice!! Just my personal opinion, that always varies from person to person. I think there is one spot similar near McWay Falls with an arch or something and it's pretty sketchy trying to get to it.

Interesting, so far ppl seem to to favor the shot with the bridge. I was torn about the bridge because I really wanted to emphasize the sea arch more. This arch makes a very nice subject on its own IMO, especially when the waves are larger and foreground grass is green.

BTW the above was shot with the 5DII @200mm uncropped. So I will shoot this location again with my 200mm+1.4 TC. I did a slight crop to emphasize the arch mor eand eliminate the bridge here:
http://landandseaphoto.smugmug.com/gallery/7491241_PmFzs#581944416_xiRLu-A-LB