Hasselblad 503CW 50mm Distagon FLE Ilford Delta 100 devloped in Perceptol 1-1

Posted by Murray Nye on Fri, 03/17/06 04:27
[ Back to Index | Home | Previous Image | Next Image ]


Comments by Jan Bjorklund on Fri, 03/17/06 06:21

Yes with your cropping of the original image I find this to be a striking landscape presentation... there is that sense of flying over some arid Earth location (perhaps even the picture from a space craft moving across an alien landscape). I like the b&w nature of the image, the sense of flow that is created by the sculptured nature of the sand created by the water, and interplay of light and shadowing.


Comments by Kahn davison on Fri, 03/17/06 07:07

I like the the lines move in this picture. There's a mystique here.


Comments by john voss on Fri, 03/17/06 08:45

hmmmm...not unlike the other shot you posted. the problem i have with this is that the three rocks draw the eye very strongly which is always the case with the areas of greatest contrast. but, the three rocks are not particularly interesting whereas the foreground rivulets are very much more so. so...were there only the one rock included (the foreground one), it would act as a fulcrum, and though still a strong attraction, allow the eye to comfortably explore the textured sand which is also an area of contrast albeit a lesser one.


Comments by Rick Longworth on Fri, 03/17/06 09:45

I much prefer the first version with the little bit of water in the upper corner. That design seems to spread the interest out and avoids overburdening the rocks. Perhaps John's appeal would be satisfied by cropping eaven more tightly as suggested.


Comments by Garry Schaefer on Fri, 03/17/06 16:23

Like John, my thought upon seeing the original, was to go for a one-rock solution which really featured the great etchings down below. One might even consider going to a zero rock solution. :-)


Comments by Richard Dong on Fri, 03/17/06 21:33

My vote was well for a uni-rock. Especially since that bottom one would occupy one of the sweetspots if cropped just above it.

And those striations are quite fetching on their own as well.


Comments by Jeff Dye on Sat, 03/18/06 08:40

You're getting there. Keep going (crop).


Comments by jacques barbier on Sat, 03/18/06 08:49

Cropping does not really work in this case, you would need a different angle in the original composition.


Comments by Alias on Sat, 03/18/06 09:04

you know this is one of the most re-worked images in recent memory
my initial response was a very minor crop

.


Comments by Alias on Sat, 03/18/06 09:05

but I'm not sure we are on the right track for THIS image

square format is really different and may be an "acquired taste"
I'm thinking it would not have made a ripple on a Hassy site
and it may appear entirely different as an actual print

besides the title is: "Surf Print" and we've been removing any trace of actual water


Comments by Jeff Dye on Sat, 03/18/06 11:14

It's getting more interesting. Not necessarily the photo but the comments. "And we've been removing any trace of actual water." Some will feel that the bit of surf jammed into the corner is necessary to tell the story. Nothing is left to the imagination (Hollywood has the same problem). By showing one or two of the rocks on the right (the lower one is enough IMO) and the patterns in the sand one can reason, without any visual sight of water, that water was responsible for these patterns. If this can be reasoned then why does the scene need the water? It's only needed by those who feel that a photograph should always answer a question (perpetual rut) rather than ask one. The "trace of actual water" is still intact. A desert sand dune is different only in that it's created by wind. The viewer of a dune knows (hopefully) that it was created by wind but the wind can't physically be photographed, only imagined in the dunes or a slow shutter speed with flowers, high grass, etc.


Comments by Murray Nye on Sat, 03/18/06 12:04

Thanks for all the wonderful comments. I plan on printing this tommorrow and because of the all the suggestions I will have several ways to proceed. Thanks again