Page 1 of 1
Bluebells, why not?
Posted: Sun 26 May 2013, 15:42
by Nina
Not the easiest thing in the world to photograph, so I had another go this year. I nearly missed the season due to the lousy weather. WDYT?
Canon EOS 5D
1/60s f/8.0 at 40.0mm iso250
Re: Bluebells, why not?
Posted: Sun 09 Jun 2013, 22:13
by Nina
Looks like no one feels like commenting.
OK here's another one. This one has been processed differently as you can see in an effort to get a "dreamy" look. Does it work?
- w_6878.jpg (856.55 KiB) Viewed 3503 times
Re: Bluebells, why not?
Posted: Sun 09 Jun 2013, 22:35
by davidc
Not sure how I missed this first time around - I like the first one and can only wonder about trying to crop a bit off the top? Dont think it really needs it though, looks good as is.
Second one is also pretty striking but after following the tree trunk down it almost led me out of the picture with nothing in the foreground bottom right to anchor the eye perhaps? You could try filling that area with cloned bluebells maybe? The first is the stronger image for me, the second is still nice but isn't as strong IMO.
Re: Bluebells, why not?
Posted: Sun 09 Jun 2013, 23:42
by Nina
Thanks for your comments David.
I do agree with you that a crop off the top of the first image concentrates the eye on the flowers, good idea!
Re: Bluebells, why not?
Posted: Mon 10 Jun 2013, 10:29
by davidc
Nina wrote:Thanks for your comments David.
I do agree with you that a crop off the top of the first image concentrates the eye on the flowers, good idea!
I don't think it needs much cropping, just a bit.
The second image definitely works better on a larger screen though, the dappled shadows on the roots is lost on a smaller screen. Maybe burn the field of bluebells down a bit where the sunlight has caught them?