s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
Photos by DeanR
Posts: 414
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
ddtphoto wrote: s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
I see it as a manmade pond with a concrete edge to it. That accounts for the dead straight line. The snow covered ground is slightly higher than the water, but not by much. Note the swan's neck getting the food.
If it was all done in post, you would expect the seagull at the very top to be removed. It is a bit distracting.
ddtphoto wrote: s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
Photos by DeanR wrote: I see it as a manmade pond with a concrete edge to it. That accounts for the dead straight line. The snow covered ground is slightly higher than the water, but not by much. Note the swan's neck getting the food.
If it was all done in post, you would expect the seagull at the very top to be removed. It is a bit distracting.
Yes - I agree...I believe that this is a single photograph, rather than 2 put together in PS. It might have been done in post, but my money would be on a single photo taken in camera.
BTW - a few people here are writing this photo off as "no big deal." While I agree that it is not THE best composed photo I've ever seen, it IS a pretty original concept.
I've been on this planet for a LONG time, and I've seen an awful lot of photos...but I don't remember seeing this composition exactly EVER. It IS a pretty clever idea, IMHO...
ddtphoto wrote: s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
Doubt if composite. Concrete walls on lakes in parks in Europe are common.
I see it as a manmade pond with a concrete edge to it. That accounts for the dead straight line. The snow covered ground is slightly higher than the water, but not by much. Note the swan's neck getting the food.
If it was all done in post, you would expect the seagull at the very top to be removed. It is a bit distracting.
Ahhh, hadn't noticed that. I guess that bumps it up a couple points.
My own opinion is that I agree it's beautifully composed. I wish it was a little darker though. The snow part is kind of blown out and I wish you could see the person's footprints better.
ddtphoto wrote: s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
An obvious composite, in your mind? Wow. I disagree.
ddtphoto wrote: s'allright. I mean, these are two separate images obviously photographed at different places and times. The contrast is stark. I get it. But I'm not putting it up there with the best. The composition is really very elementary. Still a strong composite though, thanks for sharing.
| 
| 
| edu